Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 11.djvu/149

 REVIEWS 133

in the monograph itself, however, its outcome has no more value for a general explanation of society than an equally critical study of the number, kind, and location of buttons on the costume that Henry VIII wore when he married Anne Boleyn. The meaning of tech- nique and output all turns upon its place in a complete methodo- logical system ; and in the absence of definite instruction about the correlation assumed, we cannot decide whether the author has a correct or an incorrect appraisal of the place of his work in the scale of sociological values. We feel this same uncertainty about the standard of judgment which the reviewers apply when they pro- nounce upon the work of others.

Of course, the views of Professor Durkheim himself are familiar, and in reading his monograph " Sur 1'organisation matrimoniale des societes australiennes " we are able to connect it with his general methodology. The position of no other contributor is equally well known, and the consequence is that we are often at a loss to decide how much or how little the opinions imply.

For example, an estimate of Simmel's " Sociology of Conflict," 1 signed "H. H.," concludes that "des tentatives ambitieuses comme celle de M. Simmel n'ajouteront rien a notre connaissance." If Simmel's method of analyzing social forms purported to be com- plete in itself, and to have no connections with other ways of inquir- ing into the social forms, its author would be as emphatic as anybody in pronouncing it abortive. A writer who gives no evi- dence of insight into the relation between Simmel's inquiries into social forms and his whole scheme of knowledge, cannot be accepted as a competent appraiser of his work.

A brief notice of Ross's " Moot Points in Sociology " 2 concludes with these words : " Malgre son eclecticisme et ses laborieuses dis- tinctions de conceptes, M. Ross ne semble pas avoir eclairci les questions controverses qu'il agite: ces controverses sont d'attleurs d'un autre temps." We would not imply that ambiguity in the mind of the writer as to the trifling accident of tense clouds his title to credit for a first-rate perception. We cordially recommend to our worthy friends of L'Annee sociologlque, however, that they atten- tively watch " M. Ross," for it is not impossible that degrees of othertimeliness may presently be measured from his meridian.

1 American Journal of Sociology, Vol. IX, pp. 490, 672, 798.

above.
 * Ibid., Vol. IX ; incorporated into The Foundations of Sociology, noticed

A. W. S.