The new state : $b Group organization the solution of popular governmentFollett, Mary Parker
Science
The new state : $b Group organization the solution of popular government
Follett, Mary Parker
Democracy; Political participation; Social psychology; State, The
Nietzsche thought that the man who showed the most force was the most
virtuous. Now we say that all this brute energy is merely the given,
that the life-process is the unifying of the given—he who shows the
unifying power in greatest degree is the superman. Progress is not
determined then by economic conditions, by physical conditions nor by
biological factors solely, but more especially by our capacity for
genuine coöperation.
This idea of progress clear-cuts some long-established notions. We see
now the truth and the fallacy in the assertions (1) that social
evolution depends upon individual progress with imitation by the crowd,
(2) that evolution means struggle and the survival of the fittest.
For some years the generally accepted theory of the social process was
that the individual invents, society spreads. We have already examined
one half of this theory; let us look at the other half—the idea that the
individual originates.
If a man comes forward with an idea, what do we mean by saying that he
is more “original” than his fellows? So far as the quality of
originality can be described, do we not mean that his capacity for
saturation is greater, his connection with the psychic reservoir more
direct, so that some group finds in him its most complete interpreter?
Or even if it is quite evident that in a particular instance a
particular individual has not derived his idea from the group of which
he is at the moment a member, but has brought it to the group, none of
us believes that that idea arose spontaneously in his mind independent
of all previous association. This individual has belonged to many other
groups, has discussed with many men, or even if he has lived his life
apart he has read newspapers and magazines, books and letters, and has
mingled his ideas with those he has found there. Thus the “individual”
idea he brings to a group is not really an “individual” idea; it is the
result of the process of interpenetration, but by bringing it to a new
group and soaking it in that the interpenetration becomes more complex.
The group idea he takes away is now his individual idea so far as any
new group is concerned, and in fact it becomes an active agent in his
progress and the progress of society only by meeting a new group. Our
life is more and more stagnant in proportion as we refuse the group
life.
According to the old theory, the individual proposes, society accepts or
rejects; the individual is forever walking up to society to be embraced
or rejected—it sounds like some game but is hardly life.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account