A form of particularism that until recently was quite general is one
that regards the personal wills of individual men, supplemented,
perhaps, by the similar will of a personal God, as the originative
factor in life from which all else comes. Everything took place, it was
assumed, because some one willed it so, and for the will there was no
explanation or antecedent history: it was the beginning, the creative
act. When this view prevailed there could be no science of human
affairs, because there was no notion of system or continuity in them;
life was kept going by a series of arbitrary impulses. As opposed to
this we have the organic idea that will is as much effect as cause, that
it always has a history, and is no more than one phase of a great whole.
In contrast to particularistic views of this sort we have others which
find the originative impulse in external conditions of life, such as
climate, soil, flora, and fauna; and regard intellectual and social
activities merely as the result of the physiological needs of men
seeking gratification under these conditions.
A doctrine of the latter character having wide acceptance at the present
time is “economic determinism,” which looks upon the production of
wealth and the competition for it as the process of which everything
else is the result. The teaching of Marxian socialism upon this point is
well known, and some economists who are not socialists nevertheless hold
that all important social questions grow out of the economic struggle,
and that all social institutions, including those of education, art, and
religion, should be judged according as they contribute to success in
this struggle. This is, indeed, a view natural to economists, who are
accustomed to look at life from this window, though most of them have
enough larger philosophy to avoid any extreme form of it.[8]
The fallacy of all such ideas lies in supposing that life is built up
from some one point, instead of being an organic whole which is
developing as a whole now and, so far as we know, always has done so in
the past. Nothing is fixed or independent, everything is plastic and
takes influence as well as gives it. No factor of life can exist for men
except as it is merged in the organic system and becomes an effect as
much as a cause of the total development. If you insist that there is a
centre from which the influence comes, all flowing in one direction, you
fly in the face of fact. What observation shows is a universal
interaction, in which no factor appears antecedent to the rest.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account