According to this definition, the individual also may have a group mind, as his diverse purposes are summed up in one supreme purpose, or as he has inner conflicts, the far-sighted against the narrow view, the better ideal against the worse. The reasons or motives which animate the various members of a group mind need not always be the same; they may range from deliberate choice to compulsion by public opinion or the blind following of herd instinct, the desire to “run with the crowd,” to “be on the band wagon.” There is always a margin of unassimilated purpose in either the individual or the group; neither mind ever quite attains perfect unity. Durkheim makes the pregnant suggestion, (not without its critics, it is true,) that the most unified mind was that of the primitive horde, where unity was achieved by identity; while developed societies achieve unity through organization and division of function, thus including the most diverse elements in a genuine unity of co-operation and purpose. The group mind, then, is an empirical fact, which can be perceived in many practical ways. The intellectual content, the emotional coloring, group habits which we call custom, group ideas which we call tradition, group organization by which a consensus of opinion is ascertained for the purpose of unified action—all are characteristics of the group mind, just as the parallel factors of ideas, emotion, and will are the phases into which we analyze the mind of the individual. There is a difference in every one of these factors between the group mind of America and of China, between that of ancient Greece and of medieval Italy. And the difference lies not only in factors such as language, religion and history, which are constitutive to the group, but external to the individual. It lies also in subtler matters of opinion, of emotions, which seem to be within the individual and yet must be absorbed from the environment, because they differ so strikingly from group to group. I shall go carefully into the reasons further on which impel me to consider that the Jewish people possess a group mind, even though they have no common government, language or land, and have even many divisions on questions of faith and religious practice. Here it is sufficient to note that the Jewish people act as one under attack; that a pogrom in Russia arouses the very different Jews of France, England and America to a feeling of unity and acts of relief and of defense. Labor and capital are becoming “class conscious” in opposition to each other; that is, group minds are in process of formation. The group mind appears in the behavior of the group through its constituent individuals, whether the group be a static one, dominated by the fixed habits of custom, or a dynamic one, with a great wave of progress; for behavior includes both custom and progress.