Our traditional conceptions of the morally great man, the moral hero and leader, the exceptionally good social and political character, all work against the recognition of this principle either in practice or theory. They foster the notion that it is somebody's particular business to reach by his more or less isolated efforts (with "following," or obedience, or unreflective subordination on the part of others) a needed social good. Some genius is to lead the way; others are to adopt and imitate. Moreover, the method of awakening and enlisting the activities of all concerned in pursuit of the end seems slow; it seems to postpone accomplishment indefinitely. But in truth a common end which is not made such by common, free voluntary coöperation in process of achievement is common in name only. It has no support and guarantee in the activities which it is supposed to benefit, because it is not the fruit of those activities. Hence, it does not stay put. It has to be continually buttressed by appeal to external, not voluntary, considerations; bribes of pleasure, threats of harm, use of force. It has to be undone and done over. There is no way to escape or evade this law of happiness, that it resides in the exercise of the active capacities of a voluntary agent; and hence no way to escape or evade the law of a common happiness, that it must reside in the congruous exercise of the voluntary activities of all concerned. The inherent irony and tragedy of much that passes for a high kind of socialized activity is precisely that it seeks a common good by methods which forbid its being either common or a good. LITERATURE See references upon utilitarianism at end of ch. xiv. For happiness, see Aristotle, _Ethics_, Book I., and Book X., chs. vi.-ix.; Dickinson, _The Meaning of Good_; Paulsen, _System of Ethics_, pp. 268-286; Rickaby, _Aquinas Ethicus_, Vol. I., pp. 6-39; Mezes, _Ethics_, ch. xv.; Santayana, _The Life of Reason_; Rashdall, _The Theory of Good and Evil_. The following histories of utilitarianism bring out the social side of the utilitarian theory: Albee, _History of Utilitarianism_; Stephen, _The English Utilitarians_; Halévy, _La Formation du Radicalisme Philosophique_, especially Vols. I. and II. FOOTNOTES: [139] The discussion of altruism and egoism in ch. xviii. on the Self, considers some aspects of this question from another point of view. [140] _Prolegomena to Ethics_, p. 361. [141] _Ibid._, pp. 365-66. Green then goes on to argue that this service has been in spite of its hedonistic factor, and that if the theory were generally applied with all the hedonistic implications to personal behavior in private life, it would put impediments in the way of moral progress.