It is curious that although orthodox economics has mostly ignored the importance of institutional processes, its own history offers as good an illustration of this importance as could be desired. I mean that the spirit and underlying ideas of the science can be understood only as the product of a school of thought, of a special institutional development. Footnote 68: By calling these values “personal” I mean merely that they tend to enrich persons; their economic character is multifarious. Footnote 69: Production has a special institutional development of its own which I shall not attempt to discuss in this connection. Footnote 70: Compare W. I. King, Wealth and Income of the People of the United States, chap. IX. Footnote 71: In this connection the reader will, no doubt, recall the work of Professor Veblen along this line. Footnote 72: Perhaps I may be allowed to refer in this connection to the more extended, though inadequate, treatment of classes in my Social Organization. Footnote 73: For a very strong statement by a conservative economist of the power of class over opportunities and personal values, I may refer to the treatment of the subject by Professor Seager in his Introduction to Economics, § 138. Compare _ante_, Chapter VIII. Footnote 74: Professor A. S. Johnson in a Phi Beta Kappa address has vigorously presented this line of thought. He holds that: “The ultimate need of the new industrialism ... is ... artists and poets who shall translate society and social man into terms of values worth serving.” Footnote 75: The most satisfactory account I know of the stages of synthesis in the development of intelligence, from the simplest assimilation of stimulus and consequence—as when a burnt child dreads the fire—to the most complex purposive action—as in the development and application of science—is found in L. T. Hobhouse’s Mind in Evolution, chaps. V-XIV. Footnote 76: Physics and Politics, 214. Footnote 77: Thoughts About Art, 255. Footnote 78: Societal Evolution, 63. Footnote 79: Lanier, To Richard Wagner. Footnote 80: I touch but briefly upon public opinion in this book because I have already treated it at considerable length in my Social Organization. Footnote 81: See his Hereditary Genius. Among other criticisms of his views was a pamphlet I published called Genius, Fame and the Comparison of Races (No. 197 of the Publications of the American Academy of Political and Social Science). There is a good account of the literature of the subject in Lester F. Ward’s Applied Sociology. Footnote 82: Quoted _ante_, p. 29. Footnote 83: Darwin, Descent of Man, chap. IV. Footnote 84: