Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 8.djvu/130

 116 CRITICAL NOTICES: can at no time be other than the family, never the individual, which Spencer, following Maine, assumes to be the unit of modern so- ciety. The unit of a social structure, on the other hand, is the individual, for only as such, and not as member of a family, does a man enter into the various social organs, such as the army or that of industrial workers. Again, by treating society purely as a " Naturwesen," Spencer is oblivious of the vast influence of what Wundt calls the " Wachstum der geistigen Energie" in social de- velopment. The essential feature of such development, the emanci- pation of man from nature and the gradual formation of a spiritual organism, advancing step by step with the growth of apperceptive, as distinguished from associative, thinking, is consequently ignored. Of interest is also the argument of Dr. Barth, as against Spencer and Fouillee, in favour of the conception of the " self-conscious- ness " or " ego " of society. Among the writers dealt with in the fifth chapter is J. S. Mac- kenzie, of whose Introduction to Social Philosophy a fairly accurate account is given. This author will, however, scarcely recognise himself as one of the advocates of a "dualistic sociology" ! Dr. Barth has evidently failed to realise that in England, at least, Hegelian modes of thought are still "lebendig ". The second section of part i, under the heading " Einseitige Geschichtsauffassungen," consists of seven chapters. The first, dealing with the individualistic point of view, discusses the " great man " theory, in connexion with the writings of Taine, Bourdeau, Odin and Lamprecht, not without adding some useful reflexions of its own. Especially happy is the author in showing, as against Bourdeau, that a mere summation of intelligences does not imply an enhancement of intelligence, that the difference between genius and mediocrity is qualitative and not quantitative a truth, by the way, which would bear considerable expansion in view of some recent metaphysical theorising. The longest, and the most valu- able, chapter in this section is, however, the last, devoted to the interpretation of history from the point of view of Economics, as represented by Durkheim (for whom the animating principle of historical development is the division of labour), Patten, Karl Marx, Engels and the followers of Marx. Dr. Earth's criticisms here are judicious and convincing. He undoubtedly makes good the position that not only is the method of production not the sole determining conditions of social movements, but from the first other factors have been instrumental (in primitive man, e.g., ani- mistic ideas), and the higher the stage of development reached and the richer the supply of ideal elements present, the less decisive in significance for the tendencies of a people and of a pe- riod does the existing economical situation become. The preced- ing chapter, which, under the title of " ideological," is concerned mainly with the views of Hegel, is far too slight and fragmentary. Whilst admitting a logical necessity working in history and the soundness of discriminating between epochs of construction and