An Introduction to Sociology

The new sociology promises much.  When we read what the sociologists say it is the special purpose of their science to do we are in a glow of expectancy.  But we find, as a rule, that after drawing a pleasant picture of the possibilities of the subject they go no further.  They seem to be jointly preparing an attractive prospectus for a book which it will require a genius to write, and they are waiting for the genius.

For years many of them stuck so closely to their view of society as an organism, like a plant or an animal, that their work became a mere labyrinth of biological metaphors. Society consisted of "simple connective tissue," that is, unity of speech, and so forth; and of 44 differentiated tissue, that is, social institutions.  And so it went until the whole science became one vast biological allegory which the author merely had to expound.  

Mr. Arthur Fairbanks, in his Introduction to Sociology, is one of the recent writers who shakes off the restraints of the strictly biological school.  His work is valuable rather for its suggestiveness than for actual results. He makes it clear that we need a practical working theory of society as a whole. "We have had enough," he says, "of the social philosophy which consists in a system of short-sighted wishes.  "There is a vagueness and in-conclusiveness in the work which reflects the condition of the science rather than any incompetence on the author's part.  He offers no new theory, and bases his work on no brilliant but fallacious hypothesis like that of Kidd in his Social Evolution. His analysis and description of the "social mind" are inferior to Mr. Giddings's, and he does not anticipate the objections to this phrase which naturally arise in the mind of persons unfamiliar with the work of recent sociologists.

As lie expounds it, it seems like an imposing but useless expression for a very familiar and commonplace concept. Man is different as a member of the social group from what he would be if he were solitary. Society is not composed of hermits. Society wills, thinks, and is conscious of itself ; therefore there is a "social mind." Mr. Giddings, in his chapter on this subject, makes us really see that there is an animating intelligence in society as a unit; but in the hands of Mr. Fairbanks the expression seems merely a form of rhetorical personification. A man living with one other has different ideas from what he would have if he had never seen any other human being. Should we call the result of the intercourse of these two men "social mind"? To say that the social mind acts through these two men merely means that they think alike on some points.

Social mind, then, is nothing but points of agreement in the minds of people in society. These objections are common place, and a more skillful handling of the subject might have forestalled them. It is in just such points as these that the opponents of the new sociology find fault with its expounders. For that reason it is to be regretted that an introduction to sociology does not present the elements of the subject in a more convincing way. Society must be studied as a whole if ill judged, one-sided attempts at reform are to he prevented. This is evident, and the ignorant attacks on the attempts of recent writers to find some consistent theory reveal a singular hostility to scientific progress. The pioneers in the new science have already done much, and they have done it in the fate of a continual clamour that they are fools for attempting it. It is rather hard to follow them in their explorations, and it must be admitted that they do not accomplish all that they attempt. "The small man with the little thing to do sees it and does it; The large man with a great aim to pursue dies ere he knows it."

Frank Moore Colby