The Philosophical Theory of the StateBosanquet, Bernard
Philosophy
The Philosophical Theory of the State
Bosanquet, Bernard
Political science -- Philosophy; State, The -- Philosophy
The difficulty springs from the fact, that the State, as using
compulsion, is only one side of Society, and its action is only
one side of social action. If first-rate educational apparatus is
called into existence by a State endowment, the first-rateness of the
apparatus is not due to the compulsion applied to taxpayers, which
rather, so far, negatives the action of intelligent will as such. But
it must be due, in one way or another, to the fact that first-rate
ability in the way of devising apparatus was somewhere pressing for
an outlet, which, by a stroke of the pickaxe, so to speak, the public
power was able to provide for it. We must not confuse the element of
compulsion, which is the side of social action distinctly belonging
to State interference, with the whole of the material results which
liberated intelligence produces. When we say, then, that the State as
such can do nothing for the best life but hinder hindrances to it,
the principle applies in the strictest sense only to the compulsory
or automatic side of State action, which {198} must, so to speak, be
reckoned against it [1] in comparing its products with those which
are spontaneous social growths throughout.
[1] Subject to what will be said on the theory of rights and
punishment.
But it is further true that material conditions which come close to
life, such as houses, wages, educational apparatus, do not wholly
escape our principle. They occupy a very interesting middle region
between mere hindrances of hindrances and the actual stimulation
of mind and will. On the one side they are charged with mind and
character, and so far are actual elements in the best life. On the
other side they depend on external actions, and therefore seem
accessible to State compulsion, which extends to all external
doings and omissions. But what we have to observe is, and it is in
practice most important, that, _as charged with mind and will_,
these material facts may not be accessible to State compulsion,
while, _as accessible to State compulsion_ pure and simple, they
may forfeit their character of being charged with mind and will.
This shows itself in two ways. First, just because they are facts
of a kind which come so close to life (in other words depend so
greatly upon being charged with mind and will), State compulsion
cannot with certainty secure even their apparent existence. They
fail bodily, like human beings, if there is no spirit to keep them
alive. The relation of wages to the standard of life illustrates this
point. Secondly, supposing that for a time, by herculean efforts of
compulsion, which must call active intelligence to its aid, such
facts are made to present a satisfactory appearance of existence,
none the less, {199} so far as they are characterised by compulsion,
they may lose their character as elements in the best life. That
is to say, they may fail to benefit those whom they are meant to
benefit. The fact may fail to be absorbed in the 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