Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 15.djvu/116

 I02 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

Edward A. Ross, of the University of Nebraska, in his Founda- tions of Sociology, says: "It aspires to nothing less than the suzerainty of the special social sciences. It expects them to sur- render their autonomy and become dependencies, nay, even prov- inces of sociology."

These remarks are made in discussing the "problem of coming to terms with the special social sciences, such as economics, juris- prudence, and politics," and it is anticipated that "the workers in long-cultivated fields will resist such pretensions." That is very likely — the more so since sociology invites them to turn back to old errors. In America, although not to any extent in Europe, sociology, considered as a scheme of methodology, has made some impression on scholars in established sciences. There was a time in this country (chiefly owing to Spencer's influence) when there was, perhaps, a preponderance of scientific opinion to the effect that the scheme was theoretically feasible, and that sociology would eventually be established as a comprehensive system of science. I myself held that opinion at one time, and, impelled by it, I read extensively in sociological literature. But I finally concluded that if Darwin was on the right track, sociology was on the wrong track. Political and social phenomena can never be fully inter- preted as results of individual activities. The attitude of sociology is precisely like that which a biologist would adopt if he should endeavor to discover the causes of the formation of tissues by scrutiny of the characteristics of individual cells instead of by con- sideration of the growth and development of the organism that includes the cells and conditions their activities. The true cause of the difficulties which the exponents of sociology have in formulat- ing it, is that in reality there is no basis for it as a science. All its troubles come from its primal trouble that its fundamental con- cept is an illusion. Hence it is doomed to error by its nature. In endeavoring to substitute its elaborate ideology for existing scien- tific system, it is not going forward, but backward. All of the material with which it attempts to deal, according to the various definitions given of its purpose, is already allotted to better advan- tage. Take from it what belongs to psychology, history, anthro- pology, ethics, civics, jurisprudence, economics, statistics, and charity administration, and there is nothing left of value. So far as sociology differs from established sciences, it is an asylum for their castaways.