§ 267. Of course social metamorphoses are in every case complicated and obscured by special causes never twice alike. Where rapid growth is going on, the changes of structure accompanying increase of mass are involved with the changes of structure resulting from modification of type. Further, disentanglement of the facts is made difficult when the two great systems of organs for sustentation and external action are evolving simultaneously. This is our own case. That re-development of structures for ex- ternal action which we have been tracing, and that partial return to the congruous social system, have not arrested the development of the sustaining structures and that social system fjiey foster. Hence sundry changes opposite to tiiose ennmerated above. While the revival of ecclesiasticism having for cardinal principle assertion of authority, has har- monized with this reversion towards the militant type, the increase of divisions in the Ghorch, the assertions of indi- vidual judgment, and the relaxations of dogma, have har- monized with the contrary movement. While new educa- tional organizations tending towards regimental uniformity, are by each fresh Act of Parliament made more rigid, the old educational organizations in public schools and uni- versities, are being made more plastic and less uniform.
While there have been increasing interferences with the employment of labour, wholly at variance with the prin- ciples of voluntary co-operation, they have not yet gone far enough quite to reverse the free-trade policy which in- dustrial evolution has been extending. The interpretation appears to be that while the old compulsory system of re- gulation has been abolished where its pressure had become intolerable, this re-development of it is going on where its pressure has not yet been felt.
Moreover, the vast transformation suddenly caused by railways and telegraphs, adds to the difficulty of tracing 608 THs iHDUcnoirs or soaoLoaT.
metamorplioBes of the kinds we are considering. Within a generation the social organism has passed from a stage like that of a cold-blooded creatore with feeble circnlation and rudimentary nerves^ to a stage like that of a warm-blooded creatare with efficient yascnlar system and a developed nervous apparatus. To this more than to any other cause, are due the great changes in habits, beliefii, and sentiments, characterisdng our generation. Manifestly, this rapid eyolution of the distributing and intemuncud structures, has aided the growth of both the industrial organization and the militant organization. While pro- ductive activities have been immensely facilitated, there has been a furtherance of that centralization characterizing the social type required for offensive and defensive actions.
But notwithstanding these disguising complexities, i£ we contrast the period from 1815 to 1850 with the period from 1850 to the present time, we cannot fail to see that along with increased armaments, more frequent conflicts, and revived military sentiment, there has been a spread of compulsory regulations* While nominally extended by the giving of votes, the freedom of the individual has been in many ways actually diminished; both by restrictions which ever-multiplying officials are appointed to insist on, and by the forcible taking of money to secure for him, or others at his expense, benefits previously left to be secured by each for himself. And undeniably this is a return towards that coercive discipline which pervades the whole social life where the militant type is predominant.
In metamorphoses, then, so tar as they are traceable, we discern general truths harmonizing with those disclosed by comparison of types. With social organisms, as with indi- vidual organisms, the structure becomes adapted to the activity. In the one case as in the other, if circumstances entail a fundamental change in the mode of activity, there by-and-by results a fundamental change in the form of structure. And in both cases there is a reversion towards the old type if there is a resumption of the old activity* OHAPTEB XII.
QUALIFICATIONS AND SUMMARY.
§ 268. One who made the analogies between individual organization and social organization his special subject^ might carry them further in several directions.
He might illustrate the general truth that as fast as structure nears completeness, modifiability diminishes and growth ends. The finished animal, moulded in all details, resists change by the sum of those forces which have evolved its parts into their respective shapes; and the finished society does the like. In either case results at length rigidity. Every organ of the one and institution of the other becomes, as maturity is approached, more coherent and definite, and offers a greater obstacle to alterations required either by increase of size or variation of conditions.
Then he might enlarge on the general fact that, as in individual organisms so in social organisms, after the structures proper to the type have fully evolved there presently begins a slow decay. He could not indeed furnish satisfactory proof of this; since among ancient societies, essentially militant in their activities, dissolution by conquest habitually prevented their cycles of changes from being completed; and since modem societies are passing through their cycles. But the minor parts of modem societies, especially during those earlier times when local development was little implicated with general de- R R 610 THE INDUCTIONS OF SOCIOLOOT.
yelopment^ would yield him evidence. He might instance the fact that many ancient corporate towns with their guilds and regulations of industry gradually made more numerous and stringent^ slowly dwindled^ and gave way before towns in which the absence of privileged classes permitted free- dom of industry: the rigid old structure having its func- tion usurped by a plasfcic new one. In each institution^ private or public, he might point to the ever-multiplying usages and bye-laws, severally introduced to adapt the actions to the requirements of the passing time, as event- ually making adaptation to a coming time impracticable. And he might infer tl'fkt a like fate awaits each entire society, which, as its adjustments to present circumstances are finished, loses power to re-adjust itself to the ciroom- stances of the future: eventually disappearing, if not by violence, then by a decline consequent on inability to com- pete with younger and more modifiable societies.
Were his speculative audacity sufficient he might end by alleging parallelisms between the processes of reproduction in the two cases. Among primitive societies which habitu- ally multiply by fission, but are by conquest occasionally fused, group with group, after which there is presently a recurrence of fission, he might trace an analogy to what happens in the lowest types of organisms, which, multiplying fissiparously, from time to time reverse the process by that fusion which naturalists call conjugation. Then he might point out that in either case the larger types, where they have become stationary, propagate by the dispersion of germs. Adult organisms that are fixed send off groups of such units as they are themselves composed of, to settle down elsewhere and grow into organisms like themselves, as settled societies send off their groups of colo- nists. And he might even say that as union of the germinal group detached from one organism with a group detached from a kindred organism, is either essential to, or conducive to, the vigorous evolution of a new organism; so the mixture QUALIFICATIONS AND SUMMARY. 611 of colonists derived from one society with others deriyed from a kindred society^ is, if not essential to, still conducive to, the evolution of a new society more plastic than the old ones from which the mingled units were derived.
But without committing ourselves to any such further adventurous suggestions, we may leave the comparison as it stands in preceding chapters.
§ 269. This comparison has justified to a degree that could scarcely have been anticipated, the idea propounded by philosophers and implied even in popular language. ^ Naturally — ^necessarily indeed — ^it has happened that this idea took at first crude forms. Let us glance at some of them. In the Bepvilic of Plato, asserting the fact, not even yet adequately recognized, that " the States are as the men are; they grow out of human characters,^' Socrates is represented as arguing — " then if the constitu- tions of States are five, the dispositions of individual minds will also be five'' — ^an absurd corollary from a rational proposition. Division of labour is described as a social need; but it is represented rather as having to be estab- lished than as establishing itself. Throughout, the concep- tion, like indeed to conceptions that prevail still, is that society may be artificially arranged thus or thus. Alleging likeness between the citizen and the State of such nature that from the faculties of the one may be deduced those of the other, Plato, with the above-quoted belief that the States, growing "out of human characters," are "as the men are," joins the belief that these States, with characters thus determined, can yet determine the characters of their citizens. Chiefly, however, the erroneous nature of the analogy held by Plato to exist between the individual and the State, he shows by comparing the reason, passion, and desire, in the one, to the counsellors, auxiliaries, and tradei*a in the other. Not to the mutually-dependent parts of the bodily organization are the mutually -dependent parts of the t)l2 THE nroucnoNS or sociology.
political organization snpposed to be analogous^ but rathei to the co-operating powers of tbe mind. The conception of Hobbes in one respect only approaches nearer to the rational conception. Like Plato he regards social organization not as natural bnt as factitious: propoandmg the notion of a social contract as originating goTemmental institations, and as endowing the sovereign power with irrevocable authority. The analogy as conceived by him is best expressed in his own words. He says: — " For by art is created that great Lkviathan called a Gommokwialth, or State, in Latin Givitas, which is bnt an artificial man; though of greater stature and strength than the natural^ for whose protection and defence it was intended; and in which the sovereignty is an artificial soul, as giving life and motion to the whole body; the mctgistraies, and other officers of judicature, artificial joints; reward and punish^ meat, by which fastened to the seat of the sovereignty every joint and member is moved to perform his duty, are the nerves, that do the same in the body natural;" etc. Here^ in so far as the comparison drawn is in the main be- tween the structures of the two, is it less indefensible than that of Plato, which is a comparison between structures m the one and functions in the other. But the special analogies named are erroneous; as is also, in common with that of Plato, the general analogy; since it is alleged be- tween the organization of a society and the organization of a human being — an analogy far too special. Living at a later time, when biologists had revealed to some extent the principles of organization in general, and recogfnizing social structures as not artificially made but gradually developed, M. Comte avoided these errors; and, not comparing the social organism to an individual organ- ism of one kind, held simply that the principles of organiza- tion were common to societies and animals. He regarded each stage of social progress as a product of preceding stages; and he saw that the evolution of structures advances QUALIFICATIONS AND SUMMARY. 613 from the general to the special. He did not^ however, entirely escape the early misconception that institutions are artificial arrangements; for he inconsistently held it possible for societies to be forthwith re-organized in con- formity with the principles of his Positive Philosophy.
Here let it once more be pointed out that there exist no analogies between the body politic and a living body, save these necessitated by that mutual dependence of parts which they. display in common. Though, in foregoing chapters, comparisons of social structures and functions to structures and functions in the human body, have in many cases been made, they have been made only because structures and functions in the human body furnish the most familiar illustrations of structures and functions in general. The social organism, discrete instead of concrete, asymmetrical instead of symmetrical, sensitive in all its units instead of having a single sensitive centre, is not comparable to any particular type of individual organism, animal or vegetal. All kinds of creatures are alike in so far as each shows us co-operation among its components for the benefit of the whole; and this trait, common to them, is a trait common also to communities. Further, among the many types of individual organisms, the degree of this co-opera- tion measures the degree of evolution; and this general truth, too, is exhibited among social organisms. Once more, to effect increasing co-operation, creatures of every order show us increasingly-complex appliances for transfer and mutual influence; and to this general characteristici so- cieties of every order furnish a corresponding characteristic. Community in the fundamental principles of organization is thus the only community asserted.* § 270. But now let us drop this alleged parallelism be- * TLis emphatic repudiation of the belief that there is any special analogy between the social organism and the bnman organism, I have a motive for making. A rude outline of the general conrcmtion elaborated in the preceding tween indiyidual organizations and social organizatioiM. I have used the analogies elaborated^ bat as a scaffoldings to help in building up a coherent body of sociological in- ductions. Let us take away the scaffolding: the inductions will stand by themselves.
We saw that societies are aggregates which grow; that in various types of them there are great varieties in the de- grees of growth reached; that types of successively larger sizes result from the aggregation and re-aggregation of those of smaller sizes; and that this increase by coalescence, joined with interstitial increase, is the process through which have been formed the vast civilized nations.
Along with increase of size in societies goes increase of structure. Primitive wandering hordes are without estab- lished unlikenesses of parts. With growth of them into tribes habitually come some differences; both in the powers and occupations of their members. Unions of tribes are followed by more differences, governmental and industrial — social grades running through the whole mass, and con- trasts between the differently-occupied parts in different localities. Such differentiations multiply as the compound- ing progresses. They proceed from the general to the special: first the broad division between ruling and ruled; then within the ruling part divisions into political, religious, military, and within the ruled part divisions into f o >d-pro- ducing classes and handi-craftsmen; then within each of these divisions minor ones, and so on.
Passing from the structural aspect to the functional aspect, we note that while all parts of a society have like natures and activities there is hardly any mutual dependence, eleren chapters^ was published by me in the WettnUmter Beview for Jannuy, 1860. In it I expresflly rejected the conception of Plato and Hobbei, that there is a likeness between social organization and the organization of a man's body i saying that " there is no warrant whatever for assuming this," Nevertheless, criticisms upon the article ascribed to me the idea which I had thus distinctly condemned.
QUALIFICATIONS AND SUUMABT. 615 and the aggregate scarcely forms a vital whole. As its parts assume different functions they become dependent on one another^ so that injury to one hurts others; until in highly-eyolved societies, general perturbation is caused by derangement of any portion. This contrast between unde- veloped and developed societies, is due to the fact.that, with increasing specialization of functions comes increasing in- ability in each part to perform the functions of other parts.
The organization of every society begins with a contrast between the division which carries on relations, habitually hostile, with environing societies, and the division which is devoted to procuring necessaries of life; and during the earlier stages of development these two divisions constitute the whole. Eventually there arises an intermediate division serving to transfer products and influences from part to part. And in all subsequent stages, evolution of the two earlier systems of structures depends on evolution of this additional system.
While the society as a whole has the character of its sus- taining system determined by the general character of its environment, inorganic and organic, the respective parts of this system differentiate in adaptation to the circumstances of the localities; and, after primary industries have been thus localized and specialized, secondary industries dependent upon them arise in conformity with the same principle. Further, as fast as societies become compounded and re- compounded and the distributing system develops, the parts devoted to each kind of industry, originally scattered, aggregate in the most favourable localities; and the local- ized industrial structures, unlike the governmental struc- tures, grow regardless of the original lines of division.
Increase of size, resulting from the massing of gpronps, necessitates means of communication; both for achieving combined offensive and defensive actions, and for exchange of products. Scarcely traceable tracks, paths, rude roads, finished roads, successively arise; and as fast as intercourse 616 THK INDUCTIONS OV SOCIOLOGY.
is thus facilitated^ there is a transition from direct barter to trading carried on by a separate class; ont of which BTolTes^ in coarse of time^ a complex mercantile agency of wholesale and retail distributors. The movement of commodities effected by this agency, beginning as a slow flux to and re- flux from certain places at long intervals, passes into rhytii- mical, regular, rapid currents; and materials for snstenta- tion distributed hither and thither, from being few and crude become numerous and elaborated. Growing efficiency of transfer with greater variety of transferred prodacts, increases the mutual dependence of parts at the same time that it enables each part to fulfil its function better.
Unlike the sustaining system, evolved by converse with the organic and inorganic environments, the regulating system is evolved by converse, offensive and defensive, with environing societies. In primitive headless groups tempo- rary chieftainship results from temporary war; chronic hostilities generate permanent chieftainship; and gradually from the military control results the civil control. Habitual war, requiring prompt combination in the actions of parts, necessitates subordination. Societies in which there is little subordination disappear, and leave outstanding those in which subordination is great; and so there are estab- lished societies in which the habit fostered by war and surviving in peace, brings about permanent submission to a government. The centralized regulating system thus evolved is in early stages the sole regulating system. But in large societies that become predominantly industrial, there is added a decentralized regulating system for the industrial structures; and this, at first subject in every way to the original system, acquires at length substantial independ- ence. Finally there arises for the distributing structures also, an independent controlling agency.
Societies fall firstly into the classes of simple, com- pound, doubly-compound, trebly-compound; and from the lowest the transition to the highest is through these QUALIFICATIONS AND SOMMAEY. 617 stages. Otherwise, thongh less definitely, societies may be grouped as militant and industrial; of which the one type in its fully-developed form is organized on the principle of compulsory co-operation, while the other in its fully- developed form is organized on the principle of voluntary co-operation — ^the one characterized not ouly by a despotic central power, but also by unlimited political control of per- sonal conduct; and the other characterized not only by a democratic or representative central power, but also by limitation of political control over personal conduct.
Lastly we noted the coroUary that change in the predomi- nant social activities brings metamorphosis. If, where the militant type has not elaborated into so rigid a form as to prevent it, a considerable industrial system arises, there come mitigations of the coercive restraints characterizing the militant type, and weakening of its structures. Con- versely, where an industrial system largely developed has established freer social forms, resumption of offensive and defensive activities causes reversion towards the militant type.
§ 271. And now, summing up the results of this general survey, let us observe the extent to which we are prepared by it for further inquiries.
The many facts contemplated unite in proving that social evolution forms a part of evolution at large. Like evolving aggregates in general, societies show integration, both by simple increase of mass and by coalescence and re-coales- cence of masses. The change from homogeneity to h^teroge^ neiiy is multitudinously exemplified; up from the simple tribe, alike in all its parts, to the civilized nation, full of structural and functional unlikenesses beyond enumeration. With progressing integration and heterogeneity goes in- creasing coherence. The wandering group dispersing, di- viding, held together by no bonds; the tribe with parts made more coherent by subordination to a dominant man; the 618 THK INDUCTIONS OV SOOIOLOGT.
cluster of tribes amted in a political plexus under a chief ^fith sub-cliiefs; and so on up to the civilized nation con- solidated enough to hold together for a thousand years or more. Simultaneously comes increasing definiteness. Such organization as the primitive horde shows, is vague; advance brings settled arrangements that grow slowly more precise; customs pass into laws which, while gaining fixity, also become more specific in their applications to varieties of actions; and all institutions, at first confusedly intermingled, step by step separate, at the same time that each within it- self marks off more distinctly its component structures. Thus in all respects is fulfilled the formula of evolution, as a progress towards greater size, coherence, multiformity, and definiteness.
Besides these general truths, a number of more special truths have been disclosed by our survey. Comparisons of societies in their ascending grades, have made manifest certain cardinal facts respecting their growths, structures^ and functions; respecting the systems of structures, sus- taining, distributing, regulating, of which they are com- posed; respecting the relations of these structures to the surrounding conditions and the dominant forms of social activities entailed; and respecting the metamorphoses of types caused by changes in the activities. The inductions arrived at, thus constituting in rude outline an Empirical Sociology, suffice to show that in social phenomena there is a general order of co-existence and sequence; and that there- fore social phenomena form the subject-matter of a science reducible, in some measure at least, to the deductive form.
Guided, then, by the law of evolution in general, and, in subordination to it, guided by the foregoing inductions, we are now prepared for following out the synthesis of social phenomena. We must begin with those simplest ones pre- sented by the evolution of the family.
POSTSCRIPT TO PART BL Some remarks made in the Revue Philo9i>phique for May, 1877, by an aeate and yet sympathetic critic, M. Henri Marion, show me the need for adding here an expknation which may prevent other readers frtnn being pnzzled by a seeming inconsistency.
M. Marion indicates the contrast I have drawn between those types of individnal organisms in which, along with a developed nutritive system, there is an nndeveloped nervous system, and those types in which a developed nervous system enables the organism to co-oi^inate its outer actions so as to secure prey and escape enemies: rightly saying that I class the first as relatively low and the second as relatively high. He then points out that I regsord as analogous to these types of individnal organismcr, those types of social organisms which are characterized, the one by a lar^Iy-developed sustaining or indus- trial system with a feeble reffulatmg or governmental system, and the other by a less-developed industrial system joined with isb centralized governmental system, enabling the society effectually to combine its forces in conflict with other societies. And he proceeds to show that though, in classing the types of animals, I put those with undeveloped nervous systems as low and those with developed nervous systems as high, in classing societies I tacitly imply that those with pre- dominant industrial or sustaining systems are superior to those with highly-centralized and powerful regulating systems. He says: — ** £n naturalists qu'il est, il regarde visiblement conmie snperieurs aux antres les etats les plus centralist." And then commenting on the dislike which, as " an Englishman of the Liberal school," I show for such centralized societies, and my admiration for the free, less-governed, industrial societies, he emphasizes the incongruity by saying: — *' Mais bientot le moraliste en fui combat le naturalists; et la liberie in- dividuelle, prindpe d'anarchie cependant, trouve en lui un defenseur aussi chaleureux qn* inattendn."
I ngeet that when writing the foregoing chapters I omitted to contrast the lives of individual organisms and of social organisms in such way as to show the origin of this seeming incongruity. It is this: — Individual organisms, whether low or hiffh, have to maintain their lives by o£&nsive or defensive activitiss, or both: to get food and escape enemies ever remain the essential requirements. Hence the need for a regulating system by which the actions of senses and limbs may be co-ordinated. Hence the superiority that results from a centiidized nervous apparatus to which aU the outer origans are completely subordinate. It is otherwise with societies. Doubtless during tiie militant stages of social evolution, the lives of societies, like the lives of animals, are largely, perhaps we may say mainly, dependent on their powers of offence and defence; and during tiiese stages societies having the most centralized regulating systems can use their powers most