CHAPTER XX

THE PROGRESS OF NATIONS IN THEIR MATURITY

In the foregoing chapter we have noted the great fact that the leading modern nations of Western Europe have shown a much greater capacity for progress than all the earlier civilised peoples, not excepting those of ancient Greece and Rome. I urged that this difference between the ancient and the modern European civilisations seemed to be chiefly due to a difference of social organisation. I pointed out how the older nations were essentially caste nations, resting on a basis of slavery, and how all individual rights were entirely subordinated to the welfare of the State, a politico-religious organisation held together by the bond of kinship; how, within that organisation, the rights of each person were strictly defined throughout his life by the status to which he was born; and how all persons outside this organisation were regarded as natural enemies, towards whom no obligations of any kind were felt. We have now to notice that the form of social organisation towards which all the leading modern nations have been tending, and which some of them have now pretty well achieved, is one in which the last vestiges of the caste system and the rigid bonds of customary status are rapidly being abolished. In this new organisation social classes persist, but they are no longer castes; all members of the nation are regarded as being by nature free and equal; a career is open to every talent, and any man may rise to any position by the exertion of his abilities. His position is one of extreme liberty as compared with that of any member of the ancient nations. He has definite rights as against the State. The State claims only a minimum of rights over him, the right to prevent him interfering with the rights of his fellow-citizens, the right to make him pay for his share of the privileges conveyed by its activities. And these rights it claims in virtue of contract between each citizen and all the rest. For each citizen is free to throw off his allegiance to the State and to leave it at will, and his continuance as a citizen of the State implies his acceptance of the contract.

Even in religion, personal liberty has at last been achieved; religion is no longer a State-religion, the gods are no longer the national gods, and each man may accept any religion or none. This is the most striking instance of the immense distance, as regards the liberty of the individual, that divides the modern from the ancient nations. For with the latter, the function of religion was to preserve the security of the State; and to question it in any way was to threaten the State, a principle fully acted upon by Athens in the time of her highest enlightenment and glory.

The change is very striking also as regards the attitude of the citizens of one State towards those of any other and towards even the members of savage and barbarous communities. We no longer regard ourselves as devoid of all obligation towards such persons. Rather we tend to treat them as having equal rights with ourselves, the few specifically national rights excepted, and as having equal claims with our fellow citizens upon our considerate feeling and conduct towards them.

The relations of individuals are, then, tending to be regulated, on the one hand, by contractual justice; on the other hand, by the moral obligation felt by each individual, an obligation not enforced by any exercise of the power of the State, but supported only by public opinion. The end we set before ourselves is no longer the welfare of the State, to be attained at any cost to individual liberty; it is rather an ideal of justice for every person, to which the welfare of the State must be, if necessary, subordinated. In short, instead of maintaining universal intolerance, we have made great strides towards universal tolerance.

All this represents a profound change of social organisation, a great advance in social evolution. That it is intimately bound up with the progressiveness of a people is shown by the fact that the degree to which the change has proceeded among the various nations runs parallel with their progress in all the essentials of civilisation. The change seems, indeed, to be one of the principal conditions of the progress of the nations of Western Europe and, we may add, of the American nation, by which it has been carried further than by any other. How, then, does it make for progress? We may answer this question by considering how the social system which has given place to this new kind of social organisation—namely, the caste system—renders progress difficult or impossible.

Where the caste system is highly developed and rigidly maintained, as among the Hindus of India, its conservative unprogressive tendency is obvious enough. Each man is born a member of some one of many castes, and he can never hope to pass from one caste to another and higher caste. That fact alone removes at once the two greatest spurs to effort, the two most powerful motives that urge on the members of our modern societies to the fullest development and exercise of all their faculties; namely, the desire to rise in the social scale and to place one’s children at a more advantageous starting point in the battle of life, and the fear of falling back in the social scale, of sinking to a lower level, with the consequent sacrifice of all the social consideration and other advantages which one’s position at any given social level brings with it. Under the Hindu caste system, the poor Brahmin who has no possessions, perhaps not even a rag to cover his nakedness, is sure of the social consideration which his birth gives him, both for himself and his children. He can look disdainfully upon the rich man and the prince of lower caste; and public opinion approves and supports him. This perhaps is the most important way in which the caste system prevents progress. But there are others almost equally serious.

The occupations open to the members of each caste are rigidly limited. The members of one caste must be priests only, of another soldiers only, of another scavengers, of another potters, and so on. Now, if it were true that, when dexterities or mental powers generally are specially developed by use, the improvements of faculty resulting from this long practice and use were transmitted in any degree from generation to generation, we should expect the caste system to result, after many generations, in so many distinct breeds of men of highly specialised and perfected powers of the kinds used in the pursuit of each of the caste occupations. And this might make for progress. Each man would be employed in the occupation for which he was best suited. But, as we have seen, it is probable that use-inheritance does not occur; and there seems to be no evidence that differentiation and hereditary specialisation of faculties of this sort result from the caste system[147]. In each caste men continue to be born of the most diverse powers suited for the most diverse occupations; and one effect of the caste system is that the best powers of any man will in the great majority of cases be prevented from finding their most effective outlet. That involves a great waste of faculty, which makes strongly for stagnation. We shall realize the importance of this influence, if we reflect on the great achievements, in the most diverse fields, of men who under our modern system have risen from some humble station and occupation, to which under the caste system they would have been rigidly confined.

Again, within each caste custom rules the lives of the members with much greater force than it can exert in a large and complex society in the absence of the caste system. For each caste has its own tradition and customary code, which is necessarily narrow because of the uniformity of the conditions of life of those who obey it; hence tradition and custom have a narrow and well-defined field of operation; and the narrower the field of its application, the more rigidly will custom control action.

The caste system is thus one which permits of great differentiation and specialisation of pursuits, without any weakening of the conservative forces of society. It is for that reason presumably that the social organisation of all early civilisations tended to this form. It was the most easily attained form which combined diversity with stability sufficiently to permit of the formation of a large society or nation; and it was one which made for military efficiency. It formed, therefore, a natural stage of social evolution.

In so far as the caste system still survives, it owes its survival to the continuance of the need of the State for military efficiency. And we see how its maintenance is still only rendered possible by its alliance with a State religion and its system of religious sanctions. In Russia, for example, the caste system was thus maintained by the alliance of the military power with the religious system. While we see how in modern Germany the attempt to maintain the caste system and the supremacy of the State over the rights and liberties of individuals is breaking down, as the religious sanctions are losing their hold upon the people. Social democracy, secularism, and the demand for liberty go hand in hand[148].

It is clear, then, that the caste system tends to produce a stable society and to prevent progress; and that, in proportion as it gives way to liberty and equality of all men, both legal and customary, and to the recognition of the rights of individuals as against the State, progress must be favoured.

In yet another way (perhaps more important than any other) the abolition of caste may favour development. In an earlier chapter I pointed out how every step in the development of the intellectual or the moral tradition of a people is initiated by some person of exceptional intellectual or moral power. I pointed out also how the existence of a hierarchy of social classes which are not exclusive castes, together with the operation of the social ladder by means of which individuals and families are enabled to climb up and down the social scale, tend to the segregation of ability in the classes of the upper part of the scale. They tend, in short, to produce classes capable of producing in each generation a relatively large number of persons of more than average capacities. Or, in other words, they lead to the concentration and mutual enrichment of the strains of exceptional capacity; they concentrate the best capacities of the people in a relatively small number of individuals of the favoured classes. And abilities so concentrated and raised in a certain proportion of individuals to a higher power will be more favourable in every way to the growth of the national mind than the same sum of abilities more evenly diffused throughout the population. At present it is impossible to say how far this segregation of abilities has gone, and what part it has played in forwarding the mental development of any nation. But that it has played some part, perhaps a very important one in some instances, can hardly be doubted[149].

In Europe the feudal system served to tide over the period of transition from the ancient social organisation founded on caste and the supremacy of the politico-religious State to the modern system, the transition from the system founded on status and regulated by custom to the system founded upon equality and liberty and regulated by contract. For the feudal system, although still more or less a caste system, was nevertheless founded to some extent on contract. The tenure of land involved a contract to perform services in return; and such contract was the essence of the feudal system.

But it was not until the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when the feudal system was finally broken up and the Reformation initiated the age of religious tolerance, that the modern system substantially replaced the ancient system, and the age of rapid progress set in.

In proportion as the change was achieved, the powers of all men were set free in an unfettered competition such as had never before been possible. Independence of thought and action, free discussion of all principles, and the recognition of the relativity of all truths, succeeded to unquestioning subservience to ancient formulas and customs. Each man became comparatively free to follow his natural bent, to develop his best powers to the utmost, and to secure by the exercise of those powers the maximum of social consideration and of well-being, unfettered by arbitrary restrictions, civil or ecclesiastical. I think we may fairly say that the modern pragmatic or humanistic movement in philosophy, in the midst of which we are living, represents the final stage of this emancipation of man from the bonds which he has created for himself.

We have seen, then, that the modern system of social organisation does not make for the racial progress of a whole people, but probably, up to the present time, for race-deterioration; nevertheless, it certainly makes for progress of the intellectual and moral traditions of peoples; and we can now see in what way it makes for progress. The improvement of racial qualities by natural selection of the innately superior individuals has been brought to an end; the mortal conflict of societies has also practically been abolished as a factor of race progress, as also of collective or social progress. These have been replaced by a new form of struggle for existence and of selection—namely, the rivalry and competition of ideas and of the institutions in which ideas become embodied, and the selection for survival of those ideas and institutions which are found, under the tests of practice and experience, most accordant with the truth and, therefore, best adapted to promote the welfare of societies and of their members[150].

And this process of survival of the fittest and elimination of the unfit among ideas and institutions takes place not only within nations, but has also international scope. The members of each nation no longer, as of old, regard all foreigners as their natural enemies, no longer despise their institutions and reject their ideas with scorn. They are ready to learn from others, to let the ideas current among other peoples enter into competition with native-born ideas; and so the number and variety of competing elements increases and the intensity of the competition waxes ever keener. Every idea that constitutes an important advance in our intellectual outlook or in our practical command over nature rapidly finds acceptance throughout the civilised world and displaces some less true idea, some less appropriate institution, some less effective mode of action.

Two great conditions, making for continued improvement of the moral and intellectual traditions, characterise, then, Western civilisation. First, within each nation there is going on the process of emancipation of all human faculties, so that they enter into the freest possible competition with one another on a footing of equality; this process, although now far advanced in all the leading nations, is still being carried further, and the whole trend of modern legislation is to confirm the change and hasten it to its completion[151]. Secondly, there is a circle of peoples whose ideas are thrown into the arena of rivalry, to suffer extinction or to gain universal acceptance. This circle also is constantly widening by the inclusion of peoples hitherto outside it; and each new admission, as of Japan in recent years, is a new stimulus to the further evolution of the collective mind of each nation concerned. Both these conditions depend upon improved social organisation.

How then has this great change of social organisation been effected? To put this question is to approach an immense subject, the history of liberty and toleration. I can only make one or two brief remarks. It has been suggested by many authors, notably by Kidd in his volume on _Western Civilisation_, that we owe this great change to the Christian religion. It is pointed out that the Christian religion, unlike most earlier religions, was from the first not a national or State religion but a universal religion, and that its adoption has weakened the tyranny of the State by breaking up its alliance with religion. Further, it is a religion which, by its doctrine of the immortality of the souls of all men, has tended to give dignity and value to each individual life, quite independently of personal status. Again, by its teaching of universal charity, it has to some extent softened and moralised the relations of men and of societies. But, that the replacement of a national religion by a universal religion which teaches the equality of all believers does not suffice to secure continued collective evolution is shown by the instances of Bhuddism and Mohammedanism. Both of these are of this character, yet both have failed to render continuously progressive the societies that have accepted them.

That the spread of the Christian religion does not in itself suffice to account for the evolution from the ancient to the modern type of social organisation is shown also by the fact that it had held undisputed sway among the peoples of Western Europe for more than a thousand years before social evolution made any considerable advance. Throughout that period, religion constantly called in the civil and military power of the State to enforce the acceptance of its dogmas. And that its teachings did not suffice to produce religious or civil tolerance is shown by the fierce and incessant persecutions of heretics and the many religious wars that fill the history of medieval Europe.

The religious tolerance and liberty of the modern era are rather features of a wider phenomenon, the general increase of tolerance and liberty, and they must be ascribed to the same causes as this wider fact. They imply a great evolution of the moral tradition, the most important and striking feature of which is the expansion of the sphere in which the sympathetic feelings find application. There is no reason to suppose that the feelings and emotions underlying the sympathetic and considerate treatment of others have changed in character in the historic period. For long ages men have felt such sympathy and given considerate and just treatment to those who have been nearest to them; at first to the members of their own immediate family; later to the fellow-members of their own small society; and then, as societies expanded into complex caste societies, to the members of their own caste; later, as castes were broken down, to all their fellow citizens; and still later in some degree to all men.

It is this progressive extension of the sphere of imaginative sympathy which, more than anything else, has broken down all the social barriers that confined the energies of men and has set free their various faculties in that competition of ever increasing severity which is the principal cause underlying the modern progress of peoples. It is this which has destroyed nearly all the old bonds that fettered and limited men’s activities in religion, in science, in politics, in art, in commerce, in manufacture, and has brought men in all these spheres into that intense, because free and equal, competition, which produces an ever accelerating progress. It is this which has produced the almost universal acceptance of the entirely and most characteristically modern principle of ‘one man one vote,’ a principle so hard to justify on any ground of expediency, from any considerations of the stability and welfare of the State. It is this also which has led to so greatly increased intercourse between peoples.

It is sometimes contended that the realisation of the principles of equality and justice for all men has been secured only by the strife of the social classes, by the success of the lower classes in forcing a series of concessions from the ruling classes. This is a very imperfect and partial view of the process. If the ruling classes had consistently sought to maintain their power and exclusive privileges, and to maintain all the rest of society in a state of servitude or serfdom, there is little doubt that they could have done so. But their position has been weakened from within by the extension of their sympathies. Consider the great series of legislative changes which, during the nineteenth century, transformed the social organisation of this country, especially the factory laws, the franchise extension laws, and the laws for the abolition of slavery. These were for the most part of the nature of a voluntary abdication of power on the part of the classes in possession. Consider the topics which chiefly engross the attention of our legislators and are the centre of political and social discussion. They are the providing of a better and freer education for the children of the working classes, who of themselves would probably never have thought of such a thing; the providing of free meals for school children; the providing of work and food for the unemployed; temperance laws, land settlement, and emigration, the eight-hours day, housing of the working classes, free trade and cheap food, old age pensions; all measures for raising the standard of life of the labouring classes and securing them against the tyranny of capital.

In respect of our relations to the lower peoples the same proposition holds good. It would be easy for the European nations to exterminate the black people of Africa, and to possess themselves of all their lands[152]. But public opinion will not now allow this; it insists upon our moral obligation towards such peoples, that we are bound to try to help them to survive and to raise themselves to our level of culture.

The extension of the sphere of application of imaginative sympathy has then been a factor of prime importance in producing the social evolution which underlies modern progress.

The factors that have brought about this extension have been many and complex, and it is perhaps a hopeless task to attempt to enumerate them and to apportion to each its share of influence. Undoubtedly, it has been produced largely by the influence of a relatively small number of enlightened leaders of opinion, such men as Wilberforce, Stuart Mill, Shaftesbury, John Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire—men whose original intellectual powers enabled them to criticise and reject the settled principles of their time. It was a work of liberation from custom and traditional prejudice effected by the spirit of inquiry, which questioned the validity of the old narrow conceptions of the relations of men and peoples, the old narrow prejudices of caste and nation, and discovered their fallacies to the world; discovered, for example, that men of a religious persuasion slightly different from one’s own are not necessarily wicked, nor those of a different nationality necessarily despicable and possessed of no ideas worthy of admiration and adoption.

But the ground was prepared for the reception of the teachings of such men by the conflicts of men who desired nothing of tolerance and equality and liberty. This is best illustrated by the history of religious toleration. As I said before, religion is essentially conservative and intolerant of heresies. The first effect on religion of that revival and liberation of the spirit of inquiry which we call the Renascence, was to produce not religious toleration, but rather a bitter conflict of mutually intolerant sects. And religious toleration was eventually achieved largely by the realisation of the necessity of compromise among these warring and constantly multiplying sects; it was found impossible to weed out heresy by persecution. Yet who can doubt that the Church, if it believed that it saw its way to secure the universal acceptance of its doctrines by means of persecution, would long hesitate to return to its ancient practices? The coming of religious toleration was due to the application of the spirit of inquiry to religious systems; these inquiries produced irreconcilable sects, whose strife prepared the way for compromise and toleration.

The strife of parties and sects was itself part of a still wider process; and this process must be recognised as the most important single condition of that widening of the sphere of imaginative sympathy which has been the root cause of the improvement of social organisation, of the general increase of liberty, and thus of the progress of the modern nations. This wider process is the general increase of human intercourse, both within nations and between them. Only so long as men know little of one another, can they continue to regard one another with entire hostility or cold indifference. The knowledge and understanding brought by personal intercourse is necessary to sympathy; but as soon as, and in proportion as, such knowledge is acquired, the innate social tendencies common to all men are brought into play. As soon as man understands that his fellow man suffers the same pains and joys as himself, longs for the same goods, fears the same evils, throbs with the same emotions and desires, then he shares with him in some degree these feelings, in virtue of that fundamental law of all social beings, the law of primitive sympathy; then also pity and sympathetic sorrow and tender regard are awakened in his breast; then his fellow man is no longer the object of his cold or hostile glances, as a certain rival and probable enemy, but is seen to be a fellow toiler and sufferer whom he is willing to succour, a fellow creature whose joys and sorrows alike he cannot but share in some degree.

Increasing freedom of intercourse throughout the civilised world, and beyond its boundaries also, has been the most characteristic feature of the age of progress, and in it we may recognise the most fundamental condition of that progress. Science and mechanical invention have been the means by which this greater freedom of intercourse has been brought about. First and most important perhaps was the invention of printing, the consequent spread of the habit of reading, and the wide diffusion of the written word. Second only to this was the improvement of the art of navigation, which brought the remotest peoples of the world within the ken of Europe and greatly promoted the intercourse of the European peoples, as well as the circulation of persons and news within each nation; for the development of commerce over seas implies a corresponding development of commerce within the national boundaries. Then came the use of steam in locomotion on sea and land, the press and the telegraph; and, with the advent of these, intercourse within and without became really free and abundant; mutual knowledge and understanding between men and nations grew rapidly, and the age of progress was assured.

The progressive character of the modern nations has been due, then, to the actions and reactions between the spirit of inquiry and the improvement of forms of social organisation; each step in the one respect has reacted upon the other, stimulating further change in the same direction. And the medium through which they have chiefly thus worked upon one another has been the increase of intercourse between men and nations. The spirit of inquiry has urged men on to explore their fellow men and to study foreign nations, and it has provided the means for so doing; the greater mutual knowledge and sympathy thus brought into being have in turn brought greater liberty to the spirit of inquiry, freeing it from the rigid bonds of custom and conservative tradition and enabling it to render human intercourse yet more free and abundant.

In this way we reconcile and synthesize the rival theories of the causes of progress, the view that sees in the spirit of inquiry the sole agent of progress and that which attributes it wholly to the improvement of morals and of social organisation. The great commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” pointed the way of all progress; but great and beautiful as it was, it could not immediately avail to break the bonds of the human spirit, the bonds of ignorance and fear; only gradually through increase of knowledge could man learn that all men are his neighbours, and that not only the foreigner just beyond the frontier, but also the naked savage, chipping his stone axe or weaving his rude basket for the reception of his neighbour’s head, is a man of like passions with himself, with equal claims upon justice and freedom and all that makes the humanity of man.

It only remains to point out the part in human life of a new factor of progress which promises to eclipse all others in importance. The main theme of my earlier work[153] was that only through increase of knowledge of others is each man’s knowledge of himself slowly built up and enriched, until it renders him capable of enlightened self-direction. So the main theme of this book is the development of the group mind, the increase of its self-knowledge and of its power of self-direction through increase of knowledge of other human societies.

The age of progress through which the world has recently passed was an age of progress due to increase of human intercourse and consequent increasing understanding by each nation of other nations and peoples. This better knowledge of other peoples is now reacting upon the self-knowledge of each nation, rapidly enriching it. Each of the great nations is beginning to understand itself, and to take thought for the morrow in the light of this self-knowledge; and this increase of national self-knowledge, this enrichment of national self-consciousness, is the great new factor which alone can secure the further progress of mankind. We saw in an earlier chapter that a nation is essentially the realization of an idea, the idea of a nation, that only in so far as the idea of the nation exists and operates in the minds of the members of the nation, controlling their conduct and directing it to actions having reference to the nation as a whole, does a nation come into and continue in existence. The self-consciousness of nations is therefore not a new factor in their life. But their self-consciousness is now becoming reflective and immensely richer in content; so much so that it promises to operate virtually as a new factor of tremendous efficiency.

We may illustrate the influence of this new factor by reverting again to the analogy between the mind of the individual and the mind of the nation which we developed at some length in an earlier chapter. In the developing individual, as in the evolving animal series, the development of self-consciousness is the condition of the development of true volition. Before self-consciousness and a self-regarding sentiment are developed, conduct is determined by feelings and impulses or by ideas and the desires they arouse, either some one desire rising alone to consciousness and issuing at once in action, or through a conflict of impulses and desires, some one of which eventually predominates over the others and determines action; but action issuing from such a conflict of impulses and desires is not true volition. Action is truly volitional only when the ideal of the self in relation to the idea of the end to be achieved by each of the conflicting tendencies determines the issue of the conflict.

In the mental life of nations, all those conflicts of ideas, of parties, of principles and of systems, in which each strives to predominate over and displace others, and by natural selection of which (the death of the many less fit, the survival of the few better or more fit) the progress of recent centuries has been chiefly due; all these conflicts have been more or less blind conflicts, in which the idea of the whole nation, in relation to the end to be achieved by each of the conflicting tendencies, has generally played but a small part and a part that often has not made strongly for progress. National actions were in the main impulsive and instinctive actions, like those of young children or the higher animals. And for this reason—that nations had too little true self-knowledge, and had not developed a true and rich ideal of national life—the self-consciousness of nations was too poor in content to serve as the guide of actions making for progress.

In the individual man, it is the growing richness and accuracy of self-knowledge which alone enables him to direct his actions effectively to secure his own welfare and to improve his character and powers. Just so in nations the rapid growth of their self-knowledge and the enrichment of their ideals of national life which characterise the present time must render their self-consciousness a far more efficient guide of all national deliberation and action.

The self-knowledge of the individual grows chiefly, as we have seen, through intercourse with his fellows; his idea of himself develops in fulness and accuracy in the light of his knowledge of other selves, and this knowledge in turn develops in the light of his increasing knowledge of himself. Just so the self-knowledge of nations is now growing rapidly through the intercourse of each nation with others, an intercourse far freer, more multiplex, than ever before in the history of the world; a result largely of the improved means of communication which we owe to science and the spirit of inquiry.

Perhaps the most striking illustration of the operation of this new factor is the rapid spread in recent years of parliamentary institutions. The parliamentary system of national organisation was worked out in these islands by long centuries of more or less blind conflict of ideas and parties and institutions; and now other nations in rapid succession have observed and admired the system and have deliberately and self-consciously adopted it; and still the process goes on, as recently in Russia.

Japan offers a striking illustration of the way in which the new factor operates. An intelligent people in which the national sentiment was strong, but in which national self-knowledge was rudimentary because of the isolation of the nation, was suddenly brought into contact with other peoples; through observation of them, it learnt its own deficiencies and set about deliberately to remedy them in the light of its new knowledge; and in doing so has reorganised itself from top to bottom.

In England also national self-knowledge is beginning rapidly to increase in accuracy and extent. We have begun to compare ourselves at all points with other nations, and are no longer content with the good old creed, that everything British is best. We are learning in this way our weaknesses; and the knowledge is becoming a main cause of accelerated progress. The best illustration is, perhaps, the present stir over educational questions, which is directly due to the increase of national self-knowledge resulting from the observation of other nations.

But in the future our national self-consciousness will be enriched and fitted for the guidance of the national will in a still more effective manner than by the knowledge of our weaknesses being forced upon us by the nations who are our rivals in the world. In many directions—by the historians, the biologists, the anthropologists, the statisticians—data are being gathered for a science of society whose sure indications will enable us deliberately to guide the further evolution of the nation towards the highest ideal of a nation that we can conceive. In this way, it may be hoped, the modern nations will be able to avoid that danger which has destroyed the great nations of the past, and which has been the dark cloud shadowing the brilliance of the age of progress that resulted from increasing human intercourse and mutual understanding. In this way the free play of the spirit of inquiry, which in all earlier ages has been highly dangerous to the stability of nations and which, while it was the sole cause of progress, nevertheless destroyed many of the nations whom it impelled upon that path, will make for a greatly accelerated progress; and, at the same time, it will enable us to secure, by deliberate voluntary control, the bases of society, which in all previous ages have rested solely upon custom, instinct, and the religious sanctions.

Not by any voluntary surrender of the reason, not by any subjugation of the intellect to the dominion of obscure transcendental ideas, such as is preached by Benjamin Kidd, Chatterton-Hill[154] and others who have realized the disintegrating effects of intellect on earlier societies, but by a more strenuous use of our intellectual faculties, and by a growth of knowledge, especially a knowledge of the laws of human societies, will the stability and further evolution of nations be maintained.

The nations whose progress will rest upon this basis will be in a position very different from that of the older societies to which the emancipation of the intellect was fatal. They fell for lack of knowledge of natural laws, as soon as the progress of intellectual inquiry had weakened their instinctive and customary bases. The modern nations may reasonably hope that they are within sight of knowledge which will enable them to avoid these dangers and to continue their progress during an indefinitely long period. They may even hope to progress, not only in respect of the intellectual and moral tradition, but also in respect of racial qualities; for a better knowledge of the factors at work and of the laws of heredity will enable them to put an end to the influences now making for race deterioration and to replace them by others of the opposite tendency.

Such national progress will be truly teleological; it will be a progress whose direction will be determined by the desire of an ideal end present to the consciousness of all and striven after by the collective deliberation and volition of the nation.

Thus the group spirit, rising above the level of a narrow patriotism that regards with hostility all its rivals, recognising that only through the further development of the collective life of nations can man rise to higher levels than he has yet known, becomes the supreme agent of human progress.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _History of European Thought in the 19th Century._

[2] _Political Thought in England from Bacon to Halifax_, Home University Library, p. 49.

[3] Essay on “The Nature of Democracy” in _Popular Government_, London 1885.

[4] _Psychology, the Study of Behaviour_, Home University Library, London, 1912.

[5] _Community_, by R. M. Maciver, London, 1917.

[6] _In Body and Mind_, London, 1911.

[7] _Op. cit._ p. 76.

[8] _Op. cit._ p. 77.

[9] _Op. cit._ p. 90.

[10] E. Barker, _Political Thought in England from Herbert Spencer to the present day_, Home University Library, London, 1915.

[11] _Op. cit._ p. 11.

[12] _Op. cit._ pp. 62-64.

[13] _Op. cit._ p. 74. I consider Mr Barker’s brief statement of the nature of the group mind entirely acceptable, and it has given me great pleasure to find myself in such close harmony with it. It will perhaps give further weight to the fact of our agreement, if I add that the whole of this book, including the rest of this introductory chapter, was written before I took up Mr Barker’s brilliant little volume.

[14] _Op. cit._ p. 175.

[15] This principle of primitive sympathy or simple direct induction or contagion of emotion was formulated in Chapter IV of my _Social Psychology_.

[16] It was my good fortune to witness the almost instantaneous spread of anger through a crowd of five thousand warlike savages in the heart of Borneo. Representatives of all the tribes of a large district of Sarawak had been brought together by the resident magistrate for the purpose of strengthening friendly relations and cementing peace between the various tribes. All went smoothly, and the chiefs surrounded by their followers were gathered together in a large hall, rudely constructed of timber, to make public protestations of friendship. An air of peace and good-will pervaded the assembly, until a small piece of wood fell from the roof upon the head of one of the leading chiefs, making a slight wound from which the blood trickled. Only the immediate neighbours of this chief observed the accident or could perceive its effect; nevertheless in the space of a few seconds a wave of angry emotion swept over the whole assembly, and a general and bloody fight would have at once commenced, but that the Resident had insisted upon all weapons being left in the boats on the river 200 yards away. The great majority of the crowd rushed headlong to fetch their weapons from their boats, while the few who remained on the ground danced in fury or rushed to and fro gesticulating wildly. Happily the boats were widely scattered along the banks of the river, so that it was possible for the Resident, by means of persuasion, threats, and a show of armed force, to prevent the hostile parties coming together again with their weapons in hand.

[17] _The Souls of Black Folk_, by W. E. B. Du Bois, London, 1905.

[18] _The Crowd_, p. 11.

[19] In a recent work (_What is Instinct?_ by Bingham Newland) the author, who shows an intimate knowledge of the life of wild animals, seems to postulate some such direct telepathic _rapport_ between animals of the same species.

[20] See _The Dissociation of a Personality_, by Dr Morton Prince; _Double Personality_, by A. Binet; _The Psychology of Suggestion_, by Boris Sidis; _L’automatism psychologique_, by Pierre Janet; and the descriptions and discussions of William James in his _Principles of Psychology_.

[21] _Philosophy of the Unconscious._

[22] _Die Psychophysik._

[23] _Psychologie des idées forces._

[24] _Les Sociétés animales_, Paris, 1877.

[25] _Bau und Leben des Socialen Körpers._

[26] _Medicinische Psychologie._

[27] I have argued that the great increase of knowledge of the functions and structure of the nervous system attained by recent research does but provide for the argument a surer basis of empirical data; and I have contended that some at least of the cases of disintegration of personality are more easily reconcilable with this view, than with the contrary doctrine which regards the individual consciousness as the collective consciousness of the brain-cells. See my _Body and Mind_, a book I found myself compelled to write in order to arrive at a reasoned judgment on this difficult problem, which obtrudes itself at the outset of the study of group life.

[28] _Social Psychology_, Chapter IX.

[29] See especially A. Stoll’s _Suggestion und Hypnotismus in der Völkerpsychologie_, where the events of the French revolution have been treated in some detail from this point of view.

[30] Hon. Maurice Baring in an article in the _Morning Post_ of April 21, 1906.

[31] _Social Psychology_, Chapter IX.

[32] _Op. cit._ Chapter VII.

[33] One great difference between the professional army, such as that of England, and the citizen armies of Europe, consists in the fact that the special sentiment for the army is stronger in the former; the more general patriotic sentiment, in the rank and file of the latter; though in the regular officers of the continental army the sentiment for the army itself is no doubt usually the stronger.

[34] Cp. _The Pagan Tribes of Borneo_, by Ch. Hose and W. McDougall, London, 1912.

[35] _From Religion to Philosophy_, p. 77.

[36] _Op. cit._ p. 82.

[37] Cf. _The Pagan Tribes of Borneo_, by Ch. Hose and W. McDougall, London, 1912.

[38] Mr Cornford’s book might in fact be entitled with greater propriety _From Philosophy to Religion_.

[39] 1 Oct. 1914.

[40] _Les Fonctions mentales dans les Sociétés inférieures_, Alcan, Paris, 1910.

[41] At this point I would refer the reader to the discussion of the self-regarding sentiment (Chapter VII) in my _Social Psychology_.

[42] For a brief history of the nation-state the reader may be referred to Prof. Ramsay Muir’s _Nationalism and Internationalism_, London, 1917. He rightly describes ‘nationalism’ as one of the most powerful factors in modern history. It is, I think, obviously true that we may go further and say that it is _the_ most powerful factor in modern history.

[43] _Op. cit._ p. 38.

[44] _Op. cit._ p. 54.

[45] _Op. cit._ p. 51.

[46] Chapter II. On the question of the definition of the terms ‘mind’ and ‘character’ I would refer the reader to my _Psychology, The Study of Behaviour_, Home University Library.

[47] Prof. Hans Driesch’s conception of ‘super-individual entelechy’ seems to be of this order, arrived at by the same line of reasoning. See _Science and Philosophy of the Organism_, Gifford Lectures, 1907.

[48] _Psychological Laws of the Evolution of Peoples._

[49] As examples of the best work as yet accomplished in this immense and fascinating field, I would refer the reader to the books of M. Alfred Fouillée one of the most clear-sighted, judicious, and readable of modern philosophers, especially his _Psychologie des peuples européens_, his _Psychologie du peuple français_, and his _Science Sociale Contemporaine_.

[50] _Psychologie du peuple français_, p. 4. Paris 1903.

[51] _Social Psychology_, p. 330.

[52] _Les inégalités des races humaines._

[53] This fantastic doctrine has found its fullest expression in Chamberlain’s work _The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century_.

[54] Other prominent exponents of this view are Mr J. M. Robertson in his book _The Germans_ and in his _Introduction to English Politics_, and M. J. Finot in his _Race Prejudice_.

[55] I here use this word in the large, loose and convenient sense in which it is used by M. Tarde in his _Lois de l’imitation_. I have examined the nature of imitative processes more closely in my _Social Psychology_.

[56] Meredith Townsend regards this as one of the leading qualities of the peoples of India. See _Europe and Asia, London, 1901_.

[57] Cp. Ripley’s _Races of Europe_ and Prof. H. J. Fleure’s _Human Geography in Western Europe_, London, 1919.

[58] Cf. _The Black Republic_, by Sir Spencer St John and _Where Black rules White_, by H. Hesketh Prichard.

[59] M. le Bon and more than one Indian civil servant in conversation.

[60] By G. Lowes Dickinson, _Hibbert Journal_, Jan. 1911.

[61] In the _Fortnightly Review_, Jan. 1910, and in his _Social Environment and Moral Progress_, London, 1913.

[62] _Physics and Politics._

[63] Cp. Ripley, _op. cit._ and Fleure, _op. cit._

[64] This was written in 1910, and now in 1919 the dissolution which was so obviously impending is an accomplished fact.

[65] The great myth of the racial unity and superiority of the German people, which we have noticed above, has been cultivated and propagated, with elaborate disregard for fact by the German State and its henchmen in the universities and elsewhere, in a deliberate effort to remedy by art the lack of natural boundaries and of true national homogeneity.

[66] In his _Works of Man_ Mr March Philips shews clearly the influence of the Egyptian landscape upon the arts of sculpture and architecture.

[67] Cf. Sir S. Dill’s _The Roman Empire from Nero to Augustus_, London, 1905.

[68] Since these lines were written a new mode of rapid locomotion, namely the aerial, which has resulted from the invention and rapid development of the internal combustion engine, threatens to eclipse all others in its effects upon the organisation of the world.

[69] This state of affairs has no doubt been considerably altered during the great war; the political education of Germany, a painful but salutary process, is progressing rapidly.

[70] Cf. N. Angell, _The Great Illusion_.

[71] Incipient nations have appeared where the Bantu stock has produced occasionally great warrior chiefs such as Chaka and Cetewayo.

[72] _Psychological Laws of the Evolution of Peoples._

[73] I do not propose to examine in this book the much discussed question—Are the leaders of a nation to be regarded as produced by the nation according to the general laws of biology and psychology, or as given to them by some supernatural process? This question belongs to a branch of Social Psychology which is not included in the volume.

[74] _Psychologie du peuple français_, p. 13.

[75] Ramsay Muir, _op. cit._ and J. Holland Rose, _The Development of the European Nations_. London, 1905.

[76] J. Holland Rose, _op. cit._

[77] I suggest that international emulation in this sphere may prove to be an effective, probably the only effective, substitute for war.

[78] _Bau und Leben des socialen Körpers._

[79] _Decadence._

[80] Cf. A. Smith’s _Village Life in China_. The author insists on the lack of public spirit, of the idea of action _pro bono publico_.

[81] 1906.

[82] In his _Theory of the State_.

[83] By Schaffle, _op. cit._, and all the school of German ‘idealism’.

[84] The substance of this chapter was contained in a paper entitled ‘The Will of the People,’ read before the Sociological Society and published in the _Sociological Review_, 1912.

[85] _Philosophical Theory of the State_ and Article in _International Journal of Ethics_, 1907.

[86] Cf. H. Rose, _The Development of the European Nations_ and Ramsay Muir, _Nationalism and Internationalism_.

[87] _The Russo-Japanese War_, Vol. II, p. 25.

[88] _La Science Sociale contemporaine_, p. 115.

[89] _Social Psychology_, Chapters V-IX. Dr Bosanquet’s failure (as it seems to me) to achieve a satisfactory account of the social will is the inevitable consequence of the inadequacy of his conception of individual volition. This is set out in his _Psychology of the Moral Self_, where he shews himself to be an uncompromising adherent of the intellectualist tradition. He totally ignores the existence and organisation of the conative side of the mind. His notion of volition is based upon the now discredited theory of ideo-motor action.

[90] This was written before the war with Germany.

[91] Emulation in the administration of backward peoples offers perhaps the greatest possibilities as ‘a moral equivalent for war.’

[92] Cp. Principal L. P. Jacks on the Japanese in his _Alchemy of Thought_.

[93] W. L. George, _English Review_, May, 1915, “The Price of Nationality.” “Anger, indeed, is the soul of what is called the national will. To call it a will is perhaps too much, it is an instinct and mainly an instinct to hate.... Love of country is mainly hatred of other countries.”

[94] Cf. Gilbert Murray, _Collection of Addresses on The War given at Bedford College_, 1915.

[95] Incidentally he holds up my _Social Psychology_ as a dreadful example of such an attempt and a woeful evidence of the parlous state of present-day culture in England. Such dislike of any attempt to understand that which we hold sacred is intelligible enough in the vulgar, for whom all analysis is destructive of the values they unreasoningly cherish. But it may be hoped that men of letters who set out to defend patriotism will learn to rise above this attitude, just as the more enlightened leaders of religion are learning to welcome psychological inquiry in their domain.

[96] In these respects the Church alone can enter into serious rivalry as an object of loyalty.

[97] As Dean Inge has remarked—“If they love not those whom they have seen, how shall they love those whom they have not seen?”

[98] Cp. Fielding Hall, _The Soul of a People_.

[99] This, as President Lowell clearly shows in his _Public Opinion and Popular Government_, is carried to an extreme in America and lies at the root of many administrative evils.

[100] President Lowell (_op. cit._) has clearly shown other benefits resulting from the party system; he shows especially how the party is needed to prepare a program and select candidates, if the popular vote is to give expression to the dominant opinion of the people.

[101] Cp. his _Civilisation and Progress_.

[102] On the nature and development of the moral sentiments in the individual mind, see my _Social Psychology_, Chapter VIII.

[103] _Op. cit._ p. 210.

[104] In this connexion I would refer the reader to _The New State_ by M. P. Follett (London, 1918), an interesting book in which the true nature and function of collective deliberation is forcibly expounded.

[105] Cf. W. R. Patterson, _The Nemesis of Nations_, London, 1906.

[106] _Social Evolution_, _Principle of Western Civilisation_, and _The Science of Power_.

[107] _Essai d’une Psychologie politique du Peuple Anglais_, Paris, 1903.

[108] _Op. cit._ p. 20.

[109] _History of Civilisation_, p. 137.

[110] In this connexion it must be remembered that in Hindu society the man of proved and acknowledged holiness is permitted and encouraged to procreate a large number of children.

[111] _Europe and Asia._

[112] _Op. cit._

[113] Guizot asserted that, even when new ideas and institutions have originated elsewhere, it has usually been only by their adoption in France that they have been spread through Europe (_A History of Civilization in Europe_).

[114] I cite these passages after M. Boutmy, _op. cit._ p. 168.

[115] The most frank, perhaps somewhat exaggerated, expression of the difference is _The Superiority of the Anglo-Saxon_, by Ed. Demolins.

[116] _History of Civilisation in England_, Vol. II, p. 114.

[117] _Comment la route crée le type social_, Paris, Didot et Cie.

[118] _Histoire de la Formation particulariste_, Paris.

[119] The reality of selective effect of migration is shown by the stature of American immigrants; those from Scotland are said to be two inches taller than the average Scotchman; and De Lapouge shows (_Les Sélections Sociales_, Paris, 1896, p. 367) that a superiority of stature almost as marked, may be inferred for the French and German immigrants of America from the statistics of the armies of the Civil War.

[120] A. Reibmayer (_Inzucht u. Vermischung beim Menschen_, Leipzig, 1897) insists upon the importance of isolation and consequent inbreeding for the formation of superior strains and subraces. He points out that the geographical barriers of Europe have favoured in this way the production of distinctive national types. Like Stewart Chamberlain, Flinders Petrie, and others, he regards the dark ages of Europe as a period of chaos directly due to the overcoming of these geographical barriers and the consequent prevalence of crossbreeding on a large scale.

[121] _White Capital and coloured Labour._

[122] Aristotle says “want of men was the ruin of Sparta.” Fathers of three sons were exempted from military service, and of four sons from all State burdens.

[123] Several writers have pointed out the importance of these facts and at least one professional historian has insisted strongly upon them, namely O. Seeck in his _Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt_, Berlin, 1910, vol. 1.

[124] On this topic cp. Dr Archdall Reid’s _The Present Evolution of Man_ and his _Principles of Heredity_, in which books the effects of selection by disease and by alcohol are vividly set out.

[125] _Op. cit._

[126] O. Ammon, _Gesellschaftsordnung und ihre natürlichen Grundlagen_, Jena, 1900.

[127] De Lapouge, _Les Sélections Sociales_; cf. also W. Alexis, _Abhandlungen zur Theorie der Bevölkerungs-und Moralstatistik_, Jena, 1903, and W. Schallmayer’s _Vererbung und Auslese in ihrer soziologischen und politischen Bedeutung_, Jena, 1910.

[128] Ammon’s Law.

[129] Pointed out by Francis Galton and Fouillée.

[130] On the other hand it tends (partly no doubt by deliberate design) to spread itself by insisting upon the duty of procreation. This effect is said to be very considerable in French Canada and only to be partially counteracted by a very high rate of infantile mortality.

[131] _The Nineteenth Century_ for April, 1906.

[132] In _National Life and Character_, a pessimistic though intellectually stimulating book.

[133] _Provident Societies_, by Sidney Webb, and _The London Population_, by D. Heron.

[134] It must be recognised also that in Great Britain emigration has, during the last three centuries, tended in all probability in the same direction as the various forms of social selection—namely, to the deterioration of the home population; for in all ages it is the bold and enterprising persons who seek new homes in far countries, leaving the weakly, the timid, the dull, and the defective behind in the mother country. Even the convicts that we exported at one time to our colonies were probably persons of more than average capacity, though some of them may have been innately defective in moral disposition.

[135] _Études sur la sélection chez l’homme._ Paris, 1904.

[136] _England and the English._

[137] Notably by Prof. Flinders Petrie in his _Revolutions of Civilisation_.

[138] _Op. cit._ p. 407.

[139] De Laponge does not stand alone in this opinion. Many biologists and leaders of thought have expressed it hardly less strongly, though not all of them have attached so much importance to the influence of the towns. It has been expressed in general terms by Dr and Mrs Whetham (in the _Hibbert Journal_ for Oct. 1911), by Dean Inge in a number of forcible articles, by Mr W. Bateson in his ‘Herbert Spencer Lecture’ for 1912, and by other writers in a number of articles in the _Eugenics Review_ and other journals.

[140] This conclusion may perhaps be said to be now generally accepted by those who have given any thought to the matter. A. R. Wallace argued strongly in this sense; the late Benjamin Kidd set out the evidence impressively in his _Social Evolution_, Chapter IX; and it is implied by all the many writers who, as we have noted, agree in regarding the processes of selection in the civilised nations as in the main reversed or detrimental.

[141] I refer the reader to my _Social Psychology_.

[142] In this connection I may again refer to _The Pagan Tribes of Borneo_, by C. Hose and W. McDougall.

[143] It has been translated into nine languages and was reprinted ten times in the first year after its publication.

[144] Shortly before his death Mr Kidd published (in the year 1918) his _Science of Power_. In this book he showed a complete change of face on the question of the importance of innate qualities. He denied all importance to changes of innate qualities, whether for better or worse, because, as he maintained, “the social heredity transmitted through social culture is infinitely more important to a people than any heredity inborn in the individuals thereof” (p. 273); and he made in this book a violent and scornful attack upon the late Francis Galton and upon all who follow him in believing that the decay or improvement of the racial qualities of a people are of importance for its prosperity and development, and who, therefore, approve of Galton’s effort to found a science of Eugenics. Kidd did not anywhere in his last book acknowledge that he had made this very great change of principle, which completely undermines the whole argument of his _Social Evolution_, but complacently suggested that, as Newton and Darwin are regarded as the fathers of modern physical and biological science respectively, so in the future Kidd will be regarded as having founded anew in his _Social Evolution_ the science of society. On reading the _Science of Power_ after having written this chapter, I was amazed at this assumption on behalf of a book whose most fundamental doctrine the author had himself renounced, and I turned again to the earlier work to verify my brief summary of its argument. I confess that it is not easy to make sure of what the author was driving at. But I find that Kidd, in discussing the influence of religious systems, wrote (on p. 307) “Natural selection seems, in short, to be steadily evolving in the race that type of character upon which these forces act most readily and efficiently; that is to say, it is evolving religious character in the first instance, and intellectual character only as a secondary product in association with it.” On the following page I find—“The race would, in fact, appear to be growing more and more religious,” and “a preponderating element in the type of character which the evolutionary forces at work in human society are slowly developing, would appear to be the sense of reverence.” And there are many other passages which, in spite of the habitual lack of precision of Kidd’s language, can only be interpreted to mean that the improvement of moral or religious character, on which he so strongly insists as a feature of recent centuries, involves and depends upon improvement of innate qualities in the mass of the people.

[145] Otto Seeck (_op. cit._ vol. 1. p. 270) writes—“The equipment of the legionaries remained unchanged from Augustus to Diocletian: no improvements of tactics, no new munitions of war were brought into use during more than three hundred years. The Roman saw his enemies becoming ever more terrible, his own army ever less efficient; for now this, now that, Province was laid waste and all were threatened. It was, therefore, to the most urgent interest of every citizen that this state of affairs should be remedied; the most cultured circles were familiar with the needs of the army, for all the higher officers came from the class of Senators and nobles. Nevertheless, there appeared not a single invention, which might have assured to the Roman soldiers their erstwhile superiority! Books indeed were written upon tactics, strategy and fortification, but their authors almost without exception were content to expound in a formal manner what their more capable forefathers had taught; in this literature the expression of any new idea was carefully avoided.... As in the military sphere, so also was it in all others. Neither in agriculture, nor in handicrafts, nor in the practice of statecraft, did a new idea of any importance appear since the first century after Christ. Literature and art also moved only in sterile imitation, which became always more poverty-stricken and technically feebler.”

[146] Cf. _La Cité Antique_ of F. de Coulanges.

[147] A fact which provides another argument against use-inheritance.

[148] This was written before the Great War but needs, I think, no modification.

[149] Francis Galton and his disciples have produced much evidence to show that the educated class of Englishmen includes a very much larger proportion of strains of high ability than the rest of the people, it having been formed by the long continued operation of the social ladder. There is no reason to doubt the truth of this conclusion.

[150] Prof. S. Alexander, in his _Moral Order and Progress_, was perhaps the first to draw attention to this form of the struggle for existence.

[151] This last sentence perhaps is only partially true. A rigid system of State Socialism would involve a retrogression in this respect.

[152] As the Spaniards well-nigh exterminated in the name of the Church the civilisation and the nations of Mexico and Peru.

[153] _Introduction to Social Psychology_.

[154] _Heredity and Selection in Sociology_, London, 1907; an interesting work similar in tendency to Kidd’s _Social Evolution_.

INDEX

Abdication of classes, 295

Abstract psychology, 2

ADAM SMITH, 4

Aesthetic faculty, 157

Africa and lack of leaders, 136

American homogeneity, 124

AMMON, O., 252

Analogy of national with individual mind, 147

Ancestor worship, 183

Ancient States, 285

ANGELL, N., 133

Anglo-Saxon origins, 238

Animal societies, 33, 66

Arab nation and Mahomet, 136

ARISTOTLE, 3, 192, 248

Army, as organised group, 51; organisation, 81

Asiatics and authority, 114

Athens depleted, 248

BAGEHOT, W., 201

BALFOUR, A. J., on decadence, 146

BARING, M., on Russians, 46

BARKER, E., 16, 18

BATESON, W., 262

BEATTIE CROZIER, 193

Bengal, 161

BENTHAM, 4

BINET, 32

BINGHAM NEWLAND, 29

Birthrate, 253

Blending of races, 241, 278

Boer armies, 58

BOSANQUET, on general will, 155

BOUTMY, 215, 221, 228

Brains, size of, 137

BUCKLE, 206, 217, 227, 255, 282

Bulgaria and war, 143

BURKE, ED., 181

BUTLER, 5

Caste, 183, 271, 288

Celts, 235

CHAMBERLAIN, H. S., 108, 244

Chinese stability, 141

Christianity and morals, 267; and progress, 274

Church, as a group, 95

Civilisation, and natural selection, 261; defined, 204

Clans, 159

_Claqueurs_, 29

Classification of groups, 89

Climate and race qualities, 214

Collective consciousness, 31 _et seq._, 71; mind, 12; psychology, 21; will, 48, 53, 173

Communications, freedom of, 132

COMTE, 5

Concreteness in psychology, 2

Conflict and progress, 296

Conquest and progress, 276

Contact of cultures, 283

Contagion of emotion, 27

Continuity, national, 145

CORNFORD, 70

Crowd, anger in Borneo, 26; emotions, 39; intelligence, 40; suggestibility, 40

Crowds, 22 _et seq._

DARWIN, 5

DE LAPOUGE, 241, 252, 253, 261

Deliberative organisation, 187, 191

DEMOLINS, ED, 226, 233

DICKINSON, G. L., 119

Differentiation of races, 201, 208

DILL, Sir S., 132

Dissociation of personality, 32

DRIESCH, H., 103

DU BOIS, 27

DURKHEIM, on race, 109

Edict of Nantes, 252

Egyptian culture and nature, 128

Energy and climate, 221; of races, 272

England and Germany contrasted, 146

Ephemeral groups, 88

Equality, ideal of, 184

ESPINAS, 33

Eurasians, 83

European progress, 287; races, 114

Evolution of man, 209

Factors of national development, 206

Family as essential group, 82, 165; consciousness, 159

Fear in India, 218

FECHNER, 32

Feudal system, 291

FLEURE, J. H., 115

FOUILLÉE, 19, 101, 105, 139, 162, 255

French conquests, 184; sociability, 223

Fusions of civilisation, 276; by conquest, 277

GALTON, F., 255, 291

Gauls, 231

General will, 53

Genetic view in psychology, 4

Genius and national life, 137

Geography and progress, 283

GEORGE, W. L., 178

German idealism, 15; responsibility, 15; organisation, 152

GIDDINGS, 5

GOBINEAU, 108

Gods, national, 102

GOOCH, 3

Good of whole and of all, 172

Greek people substituted, 247

GREEN, T. H., 15

Group action, types of, 57

Group mind, conditions of, 48; defined, 9, 18

Group psychology, the task of, 7

Group spirit, 62 _et seq._, 302; its merits, 79

GUIZOT, 223

HAMILTON, Sir I., on Japanese, 162

HARTMANN, V., 33, 103

Hayti, 117

Hebrew nation, 159

HEGEL, 16

HERON, D., 258

Hierarchy of groups, 80; of sentiments, 81

HILL, CHATTERTON, 301

Historians and psychology, 99

HOBBES, 3

HOLLAND ROSE, 143

Homogeneity of group, 23; of nations, 121

HOSE, CH., 72

House of Commons, 189

Idea of nation, 162, 173

Ideals, national, 183

Imaginative sympathy, 295

Impulse, national, 192

Independence, English, 224

India, and China contrasted, 124, 244; and Western culture, 118

Individual, and group psychology, 6; and social interests, 15, 152

Individualistic family, 237

Induction of emotion, 25

Infertility of peoples, 251

INGE, Dean, 262

Innate qualities, 110; and culture, 112

Inquiry, spirit of, 275, 301

Intellect, disruptive effects of, 275

Intense emotion of crowds, 24, 29

Intercourse of peoples, 167

International rivalry, 144, 167

Irish qualities, 236

Isolation of China, 165

JACKS, L. P., 167

JACOBI, 258

JAMES, WM., 32

JANET, P., 32

Japanese patriotism, 162

Jesuit system of education, 83

Justice, contractual, 288

KIDD, B., 206, 267; on GALTON, 268

KITCHENER, Lord, 64

Leaders and national life, 135

Leadership in armies, 60

LE BON, 20, 28, 136

LE PLAY, school of, 231

LEVY BRÜHL, 74

Liberty, and progress, 287; ideal of, 184

Limits of State, 188

LOCKE, 3

Locomotion, modes of, 132

LOTZE, 36

LOWELL, President, 187, 197

Lynching, 47

MACIVER, R. M., 9 _et seq._

MAINE, Sir H., 5, 229, 270

MAITLAND, 18

MARIE, 20

MARX, K., 104

MATTEUZZI, 104

MERZ, TH., 2

MILL, J. S., on race, 108

Modern and primitive man, 120

Mongrel races, 140, 243, 279

MONTESQUIEU, 104

Moral tradition changing, 246

Morality, traditional, 264; primitive, 264

MUIR, RAMSEY, 96

MUNSTERBERG, on Americans, 124

MURRAY, G., 178

My country, right or wrong, 174

Nation, definition of, 97 _et seq._

National action, types of, 170; genius, 139

Nationalism, 94, 164

Nationality a psychological problem, 143

Natural boundaries, 127

Negro race and leaders, 136

Negroes and American nation, 126

Neighbour, who is our? 298

Newspapers in national life, 133

Normans, 238

North Sea outrage, 192

Northmen, 238

OLIVIER, Sir S., 244

Organic and higher unity, 157

Organisation, types of, 150; from above, 153; informal and formal, 197

Organism, contractual, 173

Outcastes, 85

PAINE, 25

Paradox of group life, 20

Parliamentary traditions, 191

Patriarchal system, 234

Patriotism, 54, 164, 177; disparaged, 181

PEARSON C. H., 257

PEARSON, KARL, 258

Pelasgians, 247

PETRIE, FLINDERS, 244, 260

Philippines, Americans in, 118

Philosophy of history, 105

Physical environment and race qualities, 202, 213

PLATO, 17, 83

Political philosophy, German, 152

Populations, increase of, 250

Practical interests and psychology, 3

Prestige, 64

PRICE, COLLIER, 260

PRICHARD, H. H., 117

Primitive Societies, 64; sympathy, 25

PRINCE, MORTON, 10, 32

Progress, ideal of, 185; of nations, 273

Protestanism, distribution of, 115

Public opinion, 192, 197

Punans of Borneo, 72

Race qualities shape institutions, 116; endurance of, 121; crossing, 241

Racial differences, 111

REID, ARCHDALL, 252

Relations of sciences, 1

Religion and Reason, 259

Religious excitement, 27

RENAN, 4

Representative institutions, 198

Responsibility, communal, 68; national, 144

RIPLEY, 115

Ritual, 92

Rivalry, national, 167

Roman Church and celibacy, 254; civilization, 284

ROUSSEAU, 3, 53, 155

Russian armies, 59

Satisfactions of group life, 78

Scandinavian conditions, 237

SCHAEFFLE, 35

SEECK, O., 250, 270

Selection by environment, 209; by towns, 253; reversed, 257; sexual, 260; group, 264, 272

Self-consciousness in crowds, 44; of nations, 158, 160, 299

Sentiment, national, 164

SIDIS, 32

SIGHELE, 20

Social evolution, 211, 288; organisation, 204, 211

_Social Psychology_, 1, 3

Sociology and psychology, 8

Solidarity of human race, 185

Spain depleted, 254

Sparta depleted, 248

SPENCER, H., 7

State and nation, 175

States, limits of size, 131

Status to contract, 285

ST. JOHN, Sir S., 117

STOLL, 46

Subraces, 120

Suggestibility and emotion, 41

Superiority, intellectual, 263; of public opinion, 194; racial and cultural, 120

Sympathetic action, national, 188

TANCRED DE HAUTEVILLE, 239

Telepathy, 28

Tolerance, 294

TOLSTOI and anarchism, 152

TOURVILLE, H. DE, 231, 233

TOWNSEND, MEREDITH, 221

Tradition in political life, 191

Tribal conflict, 245; consciousness, 159

Two party system, 190

Unity of nation, 157

Utilitarianism, 3

Value of nationality, 177

Variability of blended races, 140; and progress, 280

Variation, spontaneous, 209

VOLNEY on colonists, 226

Voluntary groups, 77

_Vue d’ensemble_ in psychology, 2

WALLACE, A. R., on our ancestors, 120

War and national unity, 142

WEBB, SIDNEY, 258

WELLDON, Bishop, on sons of clergy, 255

WHETHAM, 262

Will of the people, 156

WINGFIELD, STRATFORD, 179

Womb of peoples, 238

World communications, 133

Written Codes, influence of, 271

* * * * *

THE CAMBRIDGE PSYCHOLOGICAL LIBRARY

GENERAL EDITOR

G. DAWES HICKS, M.A., PH.D., LITT.D.

PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, LONDON

The progress of Psychology during the last half century has been both rapid and extensive. Along the lines of theoretical inquiry significant and far-reaching results have been attained; the methods of experimental research have been successfully applied to a wide range of mental phenomena; and it is now generally recognised that in connexion with the subject-matter of many branches of scientific pursuit psychological problems of fundamental importance present themselves for solution. The object of the _Cambridge Psychological Library_ is to furnish a series of books, written by men actually engaged in the work of research, dealing with the various subjects that come within the field of Psychology. The extent of this field may be gauged from the titles of the volumes given below, some of which have already appeared, the others being in preparation.

For the reasons indicated, the _Cambridge Psychological Library_ will appeal not only to Psychologists but also to students of many other departments of scientific thought and investigation, such as Philosophy, Sociology, Art, Comparative Religion, Anthropology, Physiology, Zoology, Medicine, Education and Industrial Efficiency.

The following volumes have been arranged:

_Psychological Principles._ By Prof. JAMES WARD, SC.D., F.B.A. Royal 8vo. 2nd edition. 24_s._ net. [_Now ready_

_An Introduction to the Study of Colour Vision._ By J. HERBERT PARSONS, D.SC., F.R.C.S. Royal 8vo. Frontispiece and 75 text-figures. 12_s_ 6_d_ net. [_Now ready_

_The Group Mind._ By W. MCDOUGALL, F.R.S. Royal 8vo. [_Now ready_

_Prolegomena to Psychology._ By Prof. G. DAWES HICKS, M.A., PH.D., LITT.D.

_Psychology in Relation to Theory of Knowledge._ By Prof. G. F. STOUT, M.A., LL.D., F.B.A.

_The Nervous System._ By Prof. C. S. SHERRINGTON, M.D., F.R.S.

_The Structure of the Nervous System and the Sense Organs._ By Prof. G. ELLIOT SMITH, M.D., F.R.S.

_Mental Measurement._ By W. BROWN, D.SC. and G. H. THOMSON, D.SC., PH.D. [_In the Press_

_The Psychology of Mental Differences._ By C. BURT, M.A.

_The Psychology of Personality and Suggestion._ By T. W. MITCHELL, M.D.

_The Psychology of Dreams._ By Prof. T. H. PEAR, M.A.

_Comparative Psychology._ By Prof. CARVETH READ, M.A.

_The Process of Conventionalisation._ By F. C. BARTLETT, M.A.