Introduction to the Science of Sociology is a Webnovel created by E. W. Burgess and Robert Ezra Park.
This lightnovel is currently completed.
III. INVESTIGATIONS AND PROBLEMS
1. Conceptions of Human Nature Implicit in Religious and Political Doctrines
Although the systematic study of it is recent, there has always been a certain amount of observation and a great deal of a.s.sumption in regard to human nature. The earliest systematic treatises in jurisprudence, history, theology, and politics necessarily proceeded from certain more or less nave a.s.sumptions in regard to the nature of man. In the extension of Roman law over subject peoples the distinction was made between _jus gentium_ and _jus naturae_, i.e., the laws peculiar to a particular nation as contrasted with customs and laws common to all nations and derived from the nature of mankind. Macauley writes of the “principles of human nature” from which it is possible to deduce a theory of government. Theologians, in devising a logical system of thought concerning the ways of G.o.d to man, proceeded on the basis of certain notions of human nature. The doctrines of original sin, the innate depravity of man, the war of the natural man and the spiritual man had a setting in the dogmas of the fall of man, redemption through faith, and the probationary character of life on earth. In striking contrast with the pessimistic att.i.tude of theologians toward human nature, social revolutionists like Rousseau have condemned social inst.i.tutions as inherently vicious and optimistically placed reliance upon human nature as innately good.
In all these treatises the a.s.sumptions about human nature are either preconceptions or rationalizations from experience incidental to the legal, moral, religious, or political system of thought. There is in these treatises consequently little or no a.n.a.lysis or detailed description of the traits attributed to men. Certainly, there is no evidence of an effort to arrive at an understanding of human behavior from an objective study of its nature.
Historic a.s.sumptions in regard to human nature, no matter how fantastic or unscientific, have exerted, nevertheless, a far-reaching influence upon group action. Periods of social revolution are ushered in by theorists who perceive only the evil in inst.i.tutions and the good in human nature. On the other hand, the “guardians of society,” distrustful of the impulses of human nature, place their reliance upon conventions and upon existing forms of social organization. Communistic societies have been organized upon certain ideas of human nature and have survived as long as these beliefs which inspired them controlled the behavior of members of the group.
Philosophers from the time of Socrates have invariably sought to justify their moral and political theories upon a conception, if not a definition, of the nature of man. Aristotle, in his _Politics_ and Hobbes in his _Leviathan_, to refer to two cla.s.sics, offer widely divergent interpretations of human nature. Aristotle emphasized man’s altruistic traits, Hobbes stressed his egoistic disposition. These opposite conceptions of human behavior are explicit and in each case presented with a display of evidence. Yet students soon realize that neither philosopher, in fashioning his conception, is entirely without animus or ulterior motive. When these definitions are considered in the context in which they occur, they seem less an outgrowth of an a.n.a.lysis of human nature, than formulas devised in the interest of a political theory. Aristotle was describing the ideal state; Hobbes was interested in the security of an existing social order.
Still, the contribution made by social and political philosophers has been real. Their descriptions of human behavior, if inadequate and unscientific, at least recognized that an understanding of human nature was a precondition to social reorganization. The fact that philosophical conceptions and ideal constructions are themselves social forces and as such frequently represent vested interests, has been an obstacle to social as well as physical science.
Comte’s notion that every scientific discipline must pa.s.s through a theological and metaphysical stage before it a.s.sumed the character of a positive science seems to be true as far as sociology is concerned.
Machiavelli shocked the moral sense of his time, if not the moralists of all time, when he proposed to accept human nature as it is as a basis for political science. Herbert Spencer insisted upon the futility of expecting “golden conduct from leaden instincts.” To the utopian social reformers of his day he pointed out a series of welfare measures in England in which the outcome was the direct opposite of the results desired.
This negative criticism of preconceived notions and speculations about human nature prepared the way for disinterested observation and comparison. Certain modern tendencies and movements gave an impetus to the detached study of human behavior. The ethnologists collected objective descriptions of the behavior of primitive people. In psychology interest developed in the study of the child and in the comparative study of human and animal behavior. The psychiatrist, in dealing with certain types of abnormal behavior like hysteria and multiple personality, was forced to study human behavior objectively.
All this has prepared the way for a science of human nature and of society based upon objective and disinterested observation.
2. Literature and the Science of Human Nature
The poets were the first to recognize that “the proper study of mankind is man” as they were also the first to interpret it objectively. The description and appreciation of human nature and personality by the poet and artist preceded systematic and reflective a.n.a.lysis by the psychologist and the sociologist. In recent years, moreover, there has been a very conscious effort to make literature, as well as history, “scientific.” Georg Brandes in his _Main Currents in Nineteenth Century Literature_ set himself the task to “trace first and foremost the connection between literature and life.” Taine’s _History of English Literature_ attempts to delineate British temperament and character as mirrored in literary masterpieces.
The novel which emphasizes “_milieu_” and “character,” as contrasted with the novel which emphasizes “action” and “plot,” is a literary device for the a.n.a.lysis of human nature and society. emile Zola in an essay _The Experimental Novel_ has presented with characteristic audacity the case for works of fiction as instruments for the scientific dissection and explanation of human behavior.
The novelist is equally an observer and an experimentalist. The observer in him gives the facts as he has observed them, suggests the points of departure, displays the solid earth on which his characters are to tread and the phenomena develop.
Then the experimentalist appears and introduces an experiment, that is to say, sets his characters going in a certain story so as to show that the succession of facts will be such as the requirements of the determinism of the phenomena under examination call for. The novelist starts out in search of a truth. I will take as an example the character of the “Baron Hulot,” in _Cousine Bette_, by Balzac. The general fact observed by Balzac is the ravages that the amorous temperament of a man makes in his home, in his family, and in society. As soon as he has chosen his subject he starts from known facts, then he makes his experiment and exposes Hulot to a series of trials, placing him among certain surroundings in order to exhibit how the complicated machinery of his pa.s.sions works. It is then evident that there is not only observation there, but that there is also experiment, as Balzac does not remain satisfied with photographing the facts collected by him, but interferes in a direct way to place his characters in certain conditions, and of these he remains the master. The problem is to know what such a pa.s.sion, acting in such surroundings and under such circ.u.mstances, would produce from the point of view of an individual and of society; and an experimental novel, _Cousine Bette_, for example, is simply the report of the experiment that the novelist conducts before the eyes of the public. In fact, the whole operation consists of taking facts in nature, then in studying the mechanism of these facts, acting upon them, by the modification of circ.u.mstances and surroundings, without deviating from the laws of nature.
Finally, you possess knowledge of the man, scientific knowledge of him, in both his individual and social relations.[79]
After all that may be said for the experimental novel, however, its primary aim, like that of history, is appreciation and understanding, not generalization and abstract formulas. Insight and sympathy, the mystical sense of human solidarity, expressed in the saying “to comprehend all is to forgive all,” this fiction has to give. And these are materials which the sociologist cannot neglect. As yet there is no autobiography or biography of an egocentric personality so convincing as George Meredith’s _The Egoist_. The miser is a social type; but there are no case studies as sympathetic and discerning as George Eliot’s _Silas Marner_. Nowhere in social science has the technique of case study developed farther than in criminology; yet Dostoevsky’s delineation of the self-a.n.a.lysis of the murderer in _Crime and Punishment_ dwarfs all comparison outside of similar studies in fiction. The function of the so-called psychological or sociological novel stops, however, with its presentation of the individual incident or case; it is satisfied by the test of its appeal to the experience of the reader. The scientific study of human nature proceeds a step farther; it seeks generalizations. From the case studies of history and of literature it abstracts the laws and principles of human behavior.
3. Research in the Field of Original Nature
Valuable materials for the study of human nature have been acc.u.mulated in archaeology, ethnology, and folklore. William G. Sumner, in his book _Folkways_, worked through the ethnological data and made it available for sociological use. By cla.s.sification and comparison of the customs of primitive peoples he showed that cultural differences were based on variations in folkways and mores in adaptation to the environment, rather than upon fundamental differences in human nature.
The interests of research have resulted in a division of labor between the fields of original and acquired nature in man. The examination of original tendencies has been quite properly connected with the study of inheritance. For the history of research in this field, the student is referred to treatises upon genetics and evolution and to the works of Lamarck, Darwin, DeVries, Weismann, and Mendel. Recent discoveries in regard to the mechanism of biological inheritance have led to the organization of a new applied science, “eugenics.” The new science proposes a social program for the improvement of the racial traits based upon the investigations of breeding and physical inheritance. Research in eugenics has been fostered by the Galton Laboratory in England, and by the Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor in the United States. Interest has centered in the study of the inheritance of feeble-mindedness. Studies of feeble-minded families and groups, as _The Kallikak Family_ by G.o.ddard, _The Jukes_ by Dugdale, and _The Tribe of Ishmael_ by M’Culloch, have shown how mental defect enters as a factor into industrial inefficiency, poverty, prost.i.tution, and crime.
4. The Investigation of Human Personality
The trend of research in human nature has been toward the study of personality. Scientific inquiry into the problems of personality was stimulated by the observation of abnormal behavior such as hysteria, loss of memory, etc., where the cause was not organic and, therefore, presumably psychic. A school of French psychiatrists and psychologists represented by Charcot, Janet, and Ribot have made signal contributions to an understanding of the maladies of personality. Investigation in this field, invaluable for an understanding of the person, has been made in the study of dual and multiple personality. The work of Freud, Jung, Adler, and others in psychoa.n.a.lysis has thrown light upon the role of mental conflict, repression, and the wishes in the growth of personality.
In sociology, personality is studied, not only from the subjective standpoint of its organization, but even more in its objective aspects and with reference to the role of the person in the group. One of the earliest cla.s.sifications of “kinds of conduct” has been ascribed by tradition to a disciple of Aristotle, Theophrastus, who styled himself “a student of human nature.” _The Characters of Theophrastus_ is composed of sketches–humorous and acute, if superficial–of types such as “the flatterer,” “the boor,” “the coward,” “the garrulous man.” They are as true to modern life as to the age of Alexander. Chief among the modern imitators of Theophrastus is La Bruyere, who published in 1688 _Les caracteres, ou les moeurs de ce siecle_, a series of essays on the manners of his time, ill.u.s.trated by portraits of his contemporaries.
Autobiography and biography provide source material for the study both of the subjective life and of the social role of the person. Three great autobiographies which have inspired the writing of personal narratives are themselves representative of the different types: Caesar’s _Commentaries_, with his detached impersonal description of his great exploits; the _Confessions of St. Augustine_, with his intimate self-a.n.a.lysis and intense self-reproach, and the less well-known _De Vita Propria Liber_ by Cardan. This latter is a serious attempt at scientific self-examination. Recently, attention has been directed to the acc.u.mulation of autobiographical and biographical materials which are interpreted from the point of view of psychiatry and psychoa.n.a.lysis.
The study _Der Fall Otto Weininger_ by Dr. Ferdinand Probst is a representative monograph of this type. The outstanding example of this method and its use for sociological interpretation is “Life Record of an Immigrant” contained in the third volume of Thomas and Znaniecki, _The Polish Peasant_. In connection with the _Recreation Survey_ of the Cleveland Foundation and the _Americanization Studies of the Carnegie Corporation_, the life-history has been developed as part of the technique of investigation.
5. The Measurement of Individual Differences
With the growing sense of the importance of individual differences in human nature, attempts at their measurement have been essayed. Tests for physical and mental traits have now reached a stage of accuracy and precision. The study of temperamental and social characteristics is still in the preliminary stage.
The field of the measurement of physical traits is dignified by the name “anthropometry.” In the nineteenth century high hopes were widely held of the significance of measurements of the cranium and of physiognomy for an understanding of the mental and moral nature of the person. The lead into phrenology sponsored by Gall and Spurzheim proved to be a blind trail. The so-called “scientific school of criminology” founded by Cesare Lombroso upon the identification of the criminal type by certain abnormalities of physiognomy and physique was undermined by the controlled study made by Charles Goring. At the present time the consensus of expert opinion is that only for a small group may gross abnormalities of physical development be a.s.sociated with abnormal mental and emotional reactions.
In 1905-11 Binet and Simon devised a series of tests for determining the mental age of French school children. The purpose of the mental measurements was to gauge innate mental capacity. Therefore the tests excluded material which had to do with special social experience. With their introduction into the United States certain revisions and modifications, such as the G.o.ddard Revision, the Terman Revision, the Yerkes-Bridges Point Scale, were made in the interests of standardization. The application of mental measurements to different races and social cla.s.ses raised the question of the extent to which individual groups varied because of differences in social experience.
While it is not possible absolutely to separate original tendencies from their expression in experience, it is practicable to devise tests which will take account of divergent social environments.
The study of volitional traits and of temperament is still in its infancy. Many recent attempts at cla.s.sification of temperaments rest upon as impressionistic a basis as the popular fourfold division into sanguine, melancholic, choleric, and phlegmatic. Two of the efforts to define temperamental differences rest, however, upon first-hand study of cases. Dr. June E. Downey has devised a series of tests based upon handwriting material for measuring will traits. In her pamphlet _The Will Profile_ she presents an a.n.a.lysis of twelve volitional traits: revision, perseverance, co-ordination of impulses, care for detail, motor inhibition, resistance, a.s.surance, motor impulsion, speed of decision, flexibility, freedom from inertia, and speed of movement. From a study of several hundred cases she defined certain will patterns which apparently characterize types of individuals. In her experience she has found the rating of the subject by the will test to have a distinct value in supplementing the test for mentality.
Kraepelin, on the basis of his examination of abnormal mental states, offers a cla.s.sification of types of psychopathic personalities. He distinguishes six groups: the excitable, the unstable, the psychopathic trend, the eccentric, the anti-social, and the contentious. In psychoa.n.a.lysis a simpler twofold division is frequently made between the _introverts_, or the “introspective” and the _extroverts_, or the “objective” types of individual.
The study of social types is as yet an unworked field. Literature and life surround us with increasing specializations in personalities, but attempts at cla.s.sification are still in the impressionistic stage. The division suggested by Thomas into the Philistine, Bohemian, and Creative types, while suggestive, is obviously too simple for an adequate description of the rich and complex variety of personalities.
This survey indicates the present status of attempts to define and measure differences in original and human nature. A knowledge of individual differences is important in every field of social control. It is significant that these tests have been devised to meet problems of policies and of administration in medicine, in industry, in education, and in penal and reformatory inst.i.tutions. Job a.n.a.lysis, personnel administration, ungraded rooms, cla.s.ses for exceptional children, vocational guidance, indicate fields made possible by the development of tests for measuring individual differences.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. ORIGINAL NATURE
A. _Racial Inheritance_
(1) Thomson, J. Arthur. _Heredity._ London and New York, 1908.
(2) Washburn, Margaret F. _The Animal Mind._ New York, 1908.
(3) Morgan, C. Lloyd. _Habit and Instinct._ London and New York, 1896.
(4) —-. _Instinct and Experience._ New York, 1912.
(5) Loeb, Jacques. _Comparative Physiology of the Brain and Comparative Psychology._ New York, 1900.
(6) —-. _Forced Movements._ Philadelphia and London, 1918.
(7) Jennings, H. S. _Behavior of the Lower Organisms._ New York, 1906.
(8) Watson, John. _Behavior: an Introduction to Comparative Psychology._ New York, 1914.
(9) Thorndike, E. L. _The Original Nature of Man._ Vol. I of “Educational Psychology.” New York, 1913.
(10) Paton, Stewart. _Human Behavior._ In relation to the study of educational, social, and ethical problems. New York, 1921.
(11) Faris, Ellsworth. “Are Instincts Data or Hypotheses?” _American Journal of Sociology_, XXVII (Sept., 1921.)