The absolute determinists who have as little confidence in the moral integrity of human nature as in any moral meaning in cosmic facts are more consistent than the Stoics, but they are involved in worse absurdities. Their cynicism robs them of both an adequate motive and an adequate method for social reconstruction. Discounting moral idealism even while they exhibit it in their social passion, they ostensibly desire social reconstruction only in the interest of the class to which they belong. But their personal interests are not frequently identical with those of the oppressed classes and they are moved as much by sympathy for the plight of the victims of our present society as by any selfish considerations. They profess to be prompted by the reflection that individual action has become useless in a capitalistic age and that it is possible to advance the interests of an individual only by making common cause with other individuals in a similar predicament. Meanwhile there is hardly an economic determinist, even among those who are actually members of the class of the oppressed, who could not gain higher advantages for himself by disassociating himself from his class than by making common cause with it. This is certainly true of those who are intelligent enough to evolve or elaborate the theory of absolute determinism. Absolute determinism, when developed consistently, must disavow all other methods of social reconstruction but that of ruthless conflict. If nothing qualifies the self-interest of men, a conflict of interests becomes inevitable. This defect in method is even more important than the defect in its motive. A ruthless struggle can result in an ordered society only if the victors are able to annihilate their foes. But even in that event the interests of the members of any class engaged in a social or political struggle will cease to be identical as soon as its foes are eliminated. Thus a new and equally ruthless struggle must result between the comparatively strong and comparatively weak, the comparatively privileged and the comparatively underprivileged victors. Ultimately men cannot escape the necessity of building a stable society by the mutual compromise and the mutual sacrifice of conflicting rights. The determinists have made an important contribution to the modern social problem by revealing the brutal nature of much of man’s social life. Even if the human conscience could be sensitized to a much greater degree than now seems probable, it will not be possible to eliminate conflict between various social and economic groups.[5] Good men do not easily realize how selfish they are if someone does not resist their selfishness; and they are not inclined to abridge their power if someone does not challenge their right to hold it. Religious and moral idealism cannot be expected to eliminate, but it can be expected to mitigate social warfare. The conscience of man must finally be the force which builds a new society; and a man with