[316] In using this expression I am acutely conscious of its limitations and of its misleading character. There is nothing in which Americans so thoroughly believe as _knowledge_ and _instruction_ and _information_. A belief in education is in fact _the one prevailing religion of the country_--the one thing in which _all_ classes, without any exception, unfeignedly _believe_, and for which the entire country makes enormous sacrifices. [317] In using this expression I am not blind to such outstanding characteristics of American life as (1) the enormous amount of preventive philanthropy that exists in the United States; (2) the well-known system of checks in the governmental machinery of the country; (3) the readiness with which Americans fly to legislation for the cure of evils; (4) the American sensitiveness to pain and their hesitation about the infliction of suffering or punishment, etc. Nor do I forget the sacrifice of life entailed by modern necessities and modern inventions in countries other than America. I simply mean that owing to the constant stream of immigration, and to the spirit of youthfulness that pervades the country, the willingness of people to make experiments with themselves and their lives is one of the many remarkable things about the United States. [318] See p. 117. [319] And this despite the enormous amount of work that has been done by American biologists upon the “factors” of evolution, and upon a true interpretation of Darwinism and of Weismannism and of the evolutionary theory generally. [320] Even Professor James, for example, dismissed (far too readily, in my opinion) as a “sociological romance” a well-known book (published both in French and in English) by Professor Schinz entitled _Anti-Pragmatism_. Although in some respects a superficial and exaggerated piece of work, this book did discover certain important things about Pragmatism and about its relation to American life. [321] It is probably a perception of this truth that has led Dr. Bosanquet to express the opinion that the whole pragmatist issue may be settled by an examination of the notion of “satisfaction.” He must mean, I think, that satisfaction is impossible to man without a recognition of many of the ideal factors that are almost entirely neglected by the pragmatists--except by Bergson, if it be fair to call him a pragmatist. [322] Bourdeau, for example, has suggested that its God is not really God, but merely an old domestic servant destined to do us personal services---help us to carry our trunk and our cross in the midst of sweat and dirt. He is not a gentleman even. “No wonder,” he adds, “it was condemned at Rome.” See his _Pragmatisme et Modernisme_, p. 82. [323] I am thinking here of the words in the Constitution of the State of California (they are printed in Mr. Bryce’s _American Commonwealth_--at least in the earlier editions) to the effect that it is the natural right of all men to seek and to “_obtain_ [!]” happiness.