Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 4.djvu/694

 674 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

know what the hand clasp is physiologically, psychologically, ethically, chemically, physically; and in order thus to know what it is, he must be able to see it from the standpoints of the sciences in question.' It must be remembered constantly that the sociolo- gist wants to know about the associating, the relating, the recipro- cality, of the persons concerned in this hand clasp, as that asso- ciating is expressed in, or set up by, the hand clasp. And if he would thoroughly comprehend this, he must avail himself of analyses of this act which sift it to its very ultimates. He must know what it means when seen from the standpoints of those sciences which have made it their task to study it from their own points of view. It may be to them state of consciousness, bodily function, or physical change ; and while it will be to him also state of consciousness, bodily function, and physical change, yet, translating these into terms of association, he will read them as the components or phases — psychical, physiological, phys- ical — of the association of the persons concerned as expressed, or as instituted, in the act named. In other words, while he will see the phenomena as state of consciousness, bodily function, and physical change, and see them in these differing aspects as clearly as does the psychologist, the physiologist, or the physicist, he will none the less see them in every case as centripetal to his attention's focus, i. e., the associating, the relating, the reciprocal functioning, of the persons concerned.

Thus we are brought to a point where we may say of the soci- ologist, as we have said of the psychologist : Let him consider any fact the relation of which to his task he can make clear, and so long as he considers it as centripetal to his attention's focus — the association of human beings — he cannot justly be complained

■ This does not mean that the sociologist must be ethical philosopher, physi- ologist, psychologist, chemist, and physicist, in the sense of being a specialist in each, any more than the psychologist dealing with vision must be specialist enough in physics, or physiology, or chemistry, or anatomy, to have discovered and formulated the principles he uses which belong to these respective domains of science. The sociologist need not have elaborated all the data he uses, anymore than the biologist needs to have elaborated his microscope. But he must be able to see the meaning of those data from the standpoint of the man who elaborated them, just as clearly as possible, if he proposes to make a proper use of them for his own purposes.