按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
f 〃The Descent of Man〃： it is an accumulation of typical facts； all tending to diminish the distance between us and our brothers； the lower animals。 One might say that the naturalist had here taken as his motto； 〃Whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased； and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted。〃 Homologous structures； the survival in man of certain organs of animals； the rudiments in the animal of certain human faculties； a multitude of facts of this sort； led Darwin to the conclusion that there is no ground for supposing that the 〃king of the universe〃 is exempt from universal laws。 Thus belief in the imperium in imperio has been； as it were； whittled away by the progress of the naturalistic spirit； itself continually strengthened by the conquests of the natural sciences。 The tendency may； indeed； drag the social sciences into overstrained analogies； such； for instance； as the assimilation of societies to organisms。 But it will； at least； have had the merit of helping sociology to shake off the pre…conception that the groups formed by men are artificial； and that history is completely at the mercy of chance。 Some years before the appearance of 〃The Origin of Species〃； Auguste Comte had pointed out the importance； as regards the unification of positive knowledge； of the conviction that the social world； the last refuge of spiritualism； is itself subject to determininism。 It cannot be doubted that the movement of thought which Darwin's discoveries promoted contributed to the spread of this conviction； by breaking down the traditional barrier which cut man off from Nature。
But Nature； according to modern naturalists； is no immutable thing： it is rather perpetual movement； continual progression。 Their discoveries batter a breach directly into the Aristotelian notion of species； they refuse to see in the animal world a collection of immutable types； distinct from all eternity； and corresponding； as Cuvier said； to so many particular thoughts of the Creator。 Darwin especially congratulated himself upon having been able to deal this doctrine the coup de grace： immutability is； he says； his chief enemy； and he is concerned to showtherein following up Lyell's workthat everything in the organic world； as in the inorganic； is explained by insensible but incessant transformations。 〃Nature makes no leaps〃〃Nature knows no gaps〃： these two dicta form； as it were； the two landmarks between which Darwin's idea of transformation is worked out。 That is to say； the development of Darwinism is calculated to further the application of the philosophy of Becoming to the study of human institutions。
The progress of the natural sciences thus brings unexpected reinforcements to the revolution which the progress of historical discipline had begun。 The first attempt to constitute an actual science of social phenomena that； namely； of the economistshad resulted in laws which were called natural； and which were believed to be eternal and universal； valid for all times and all places。 But this perpetuality； brother； as Knies said； of the immutability of the old zoology； did not long hold out against the ever swelling tide of the historical movement。 Knowledge of the transformations that had taken place in language； of the early phases of the family； of religion； of property； had all favoured the revival of the Heraclitean view： panta rei。 As to the categories of political economy； it was soon to be recognised； as by Lassalle； that they too are only historical。 The philosophy of history； moreover； gave expression under various forms to the same tendency。 Hegel declares that 〃all that is real is rational；〃 but at the same time he shows that all that is real is ephemeral； and that for history there is nothing fixed beneath the sun。 It is this sense of universal evolution that Darwin came with fresh authority to enlarge。 It was in the name of biological facts themselves that he taught us to see only slow metamorphoses in the history of institutions； and to be always on the outlook for survivals side by side with rudimentary forms。 Anyone who reads 〃Primitive Culture〃； by Tylor；a writer closely connected with Darwinwill be able to estimate the services which these cardinal ideas were to render to the social sciences when the age of comparative research had succeeded to that of a priori construction。
Let us note； moreover； that the philosophy of Becoming in passing through the Darwinian biology became； as it were； filtered： it got rid of those traces of finalism； which； under different forms； it had preserved through all the systems of German Romanticism。 Even in Herbert Spencer； it has been plausibly argued； one can detect something of that sort of mystic confidence in forces spontaneously directing life； which forms the very essence of those systems。 But Darwin's observations were precisely calculated to render such an hypothesis futile。 At first people may have failed to see this； and we call to mind the ponderous sarcasms of Flourens when he objected to the theory of Natural Selection that it attributed to nature a power of free choice。 〃Nature endowed with will！ That was the final error of last century； but the nineteenth no longer deals in personifications。〃 （P。 Flourens； 〃Examen du Livre de M。 Darwin sur l'Origine des Especes〃； page 53； Paris； 1864。 See also Huxley； 〃Criticisms on the 'Origin of Species'〃； 〃Collected Essays〃； Vol。 II； page 102； London； 1902。） In fact Darwin himself put his readers on their guard against the metaphors he was obliged to use。 The processes by which he explains the survival of the fittest are far from affording any indication of the design of some transcendent breeder。 Nor； if we look closely； do they even imply immanent effort in the animal； the sorting out can be brought about mechanically； simply by the action of the environment。 In this connection Huxley could with good reason maintain that Darwin's originality consisted in showing how harmonies which hitherto had been taken to imply the agency of intelligence and will could be explained without any such intervention。 So； when later on； objective sociology declares that； even when social phenomena are in question； all finalist preconceptions must be distrusted if a science is to be constituted； it is to Darwin that its thanks are due； he had long been clearing paths for it which lay well away from the old familiar road trodden by so many theories of evolution。
This anti…finalist doctrine； when fully worked out； was； moreover； calculated to aid in the needful dissociation of two notions： that of evolution and that of progress。 In application to society these had long been confounded； and； as a consequence； the general idea seemed to be that only one type of evolution was here possible。 Do we not detect such a view in Comte's sociology； and perhaps even in Herbert Spencer's？ Whoever； indeed； assumes an end for evolution is naturally inclined to think that only one road leads to that end。 But those whose minds the Darwinian theory has enlightened are aware that the transformations of living beings depend primarily upon their conditions； and that it is these conditions which are the agents of selection from among individual variations。 Hence； it immediately follows that transformations are not necessarily improvements。 Here； Darwin's thought hesitated。 Logically his theory proves； as Ray Lankester pointed out； that the struggle for existence may have as its outcome degeneration as well as amelioration： evolution may be regressive as well as progressive。 Then； tooand this is especially to be borne in mindeach species takes its good where it finds it； seeks its own path and survives as best it can。 Apply this notion to society and you arrive at the theory of multilinear evolution。 Divergencies will no longer surprise you。 You will be forewarned not to apply to all civilisations the same measure of progress； and you will recognise that types of evolution may differ just as social species themselves differ。 Have we not here one of the conceptions which mark off sociology proper from the old philosophy of history？
But if we are to estimate the influence of Darwinism upon sociological conceptions； we must not dwell only upon the way in which Darwin impressed the general notion of evolution upon the minds of thinkers。 We must go into details。 We must consider the influence of the particular theories by which he explained the mechanism of this evolution。 The name of the author of 〃The Origin of Species〃 has been especially attached； as everyone knows； to the doctrines of 〃natural selection〃 and of 〃struggle for existence；〃 completed by the notion of 〃individual variation。〃 These doctrines were turned to account by very different schools of social philosophy。 Pessimistic and optimistic； aristocratic and democratic； individualistic and socialistic systems were to war with each other for years by casting scraps of Darwinism at each other's heads。
It was the spectacle of human contrivance that suggested to Darwin his conception of natural selection。 It was in studying the methods of pigeon breeders that he divined the processes by which nature； in the absence of design； obtains analogous results in the differen