Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 10.djvu/259

 REVIEWS 247

self-determination" (Geist der Selbstbestimmung) ; their economics as the objectification of their " spirit of self-initiative " (Geist der Selbstbetatigung) ; their intellectual activities as the reflex of their "spirit of sel f -completion " (Geist der Selbstve rvollkommnung) ; and their social life as the output of their " spirit of self-assertion " (Geist der Selbstbehauptung). For purposes of bluff we have an exhaustless stock of undigested overratings of ourselves, but when we find a thinker taking us seriously our sense of humor must restrain us from posing as demonstration of these four ample dimensions. We shall want to ask : " Are not other men so ? " " Is anything really true of Americans under these rubrics that is not also true of other nations?" " Do the Americans differ from other peoples in the four- squareness of their display of these common principles ? " " Is not the whole scheme of interpretation too aprioristic for positive value ? "

On the other hand, the author is, in the first place, not to be understood as saying that either of these principles operates exclu- sively in the division of life for which it is made the test. Each has a certain pre-eminence in that division, while the others, and all minor social forces, fall into a certain subordination to it. This should go without saying, but may be noted in passing. In the second place, the argument is not that these principles are at work in Americans and not in other men. 1'he author rather says to his countrymen : " These principles reach a relatively higher degree of determining influence in these departments of American life than in the corresponding departments of German life. The objective facts of American life can be understood only in their relation to these principles."

I confess that while reading the book I have felt, for my share of Americanism, very much as I suspect President Roosevelt must have felt when he read of himself in Mr. Riis's overweighted eulogy. For our own horizon Professor Miinsterberg has too highly idealized America. Among ourselves we could not make out as good a case for ourselves as he presents for us to the Germans. This is not to say that he fails to write judicially, or that he omits reference to necessary qualifications. The proportions and the shading are due to the fact that he is addressing a public in which the worst that can be said of us has had undue currency, and the best has had no adequate representation.

If we can give the book the benefit of these provisos, we shall find it a first-rate help to national self-knowledge. Although it dis-