Social Recapitulation. Educational Review, Vol. XVIII, ALLIN, ARThur. P. 344. CHAMBERLAIN, ALEXANDER F. The Child and Childhood in Folk Thought. The Macmillan Co. The Child: A Study in the Evolution of Man. Ibid. CUSHING, F. H. Manual Concepts: A Study of the Influence of Hand- The Educational Situation. Ibid. Psychological Aspects of the Curriculum. XIII, p. 356. Educational Review, Vol. Primary-Education Fetich. Forum, Vol. XXV, p. 315. The Place of Manual Training in the Elementary Course of Study. Manual Training Magazine, Vol. II, p. 193. Are the Schools Doing What the People Want Them to Do? Educational Review, Vol. XXI, p. 459. DEWEY AND RUNYON. The Elementary School Record. The University of Chicago Press. DOPP, KATHARINE E. The Place of Industry in Elementary Education. Ibid. Social and Industrial History Series. Rand, McNally & Co. 'DUTTON, S. T. Social Phases of Education. The Macmillan Co. EBY, F. The Educational Value of Manual Constructive Work. Education, Vol. XVIII, p. 49. GUILLET. Recapitulation and Education. Pedagogical Seminary, Vol. VII, p. 397. Hall, G. StaNLEY. Story of a Sand Pile. Scribner's Magazine, Vol. III. HENDERSON, C. H. A New Programme in Education. Atlantic, Vol. LXXXI, p. 760. JACKMAN, WILBUR S. Constructive Work in the Common School. Educa tional Review, Vol. X, p. 248. JOHNSON, G. E. An Educational Experiment. Pedagogical Seminary, Vol. VI, p. 513. JOHNSON, J. The Savagery of Boyhood. Popular Science Monthly, Vol. XXXI, p. 796. Rudimentary Society among Boys. (Johns Hopkins University Studies ., No. XI, 2d ser.) Baltimore, Md., 1884. Reprint. McDonough, M.D., 1893. MANNY, F. A. The Curriculum as a Social Growth. School and Home Education, Vol. V, p. 225. RICE, EMILY J. Social Occupations in History. Course of Study, Chicago Constructive Work in History. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 406. RICHARDS, ARTHUR W. The Thought Side of Manual Training. Manual Training Magazine, Vol. III, p. 61. From the Practical to the Intellectual in Manual Training. N. E. A. Report, 1902. SMALL, ALBION W. Some Demands of Sociology upon Pedagogy. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, Vol. II, p. 839. THOMAS, W. I. The Gaming Instinct. Ibid., Vol. VI, p. 750. Sex in Primitive Industry. Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 474. VANDEWALKER, NINA C. The Culture-Epoch Theory from an Anthropological Standpoint. Educational Review, Vol. XV, p. 374. Some Demands of Education upon Anthropology. AMERICAN Journal OF SOCIOLOGY, Vol. II, p. 839. VEBLEN, THORSTEIN. The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor. Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 187. YOUNG, ELLA FLAGG. Isolation in the School. The University of Chicago Press. The Elementary School Teacher and Course of Study. Ibid. THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO. KATHARINE E. DOPP. THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS AS DETERMINING THE SOCIOLOGICAL FORM OF THE GROUP. II. MERELY another variation of the same fundamental sociological constellation may be expressed in the observation that relationships of twos, composition of a whole out of only two participants, must presuppose a higher degree of individualization on the part of each of these than, caeteris paribus, in the case of combinations of many elements. In the present instance the essential factor is that in a combination of two there is no majority which can override the individual, and that occasion for such a majority is given so soon as a single unit is added. Relationships, however, in which the domination of an individual by a majority is possible, not merely depress the individuality, but, so far as they are voluntary, they will not be readily entered upon by very decided individualities. In this connection, nevertheless, we must distinguish two frequently interchanged concepts; namely, the decided and the strong individuality. There are persons and collective structures of the extremest individualization that, however, have not the energy to protect this peculiarity against suppressions or leveling forces. On the contrary, the strong personality may confirm its formation in reaction with these very contrasts, in struggle for its peculiarity, and in opposition to all temptations to smoothing and mixture. The former, the merely qualitative individuality, will shun unions in which it finds itself in antithesis with an eventual majority; it is, on the contrary, as it were, predestined to the manifold unions in pairs, because, by reason of its differentiation, as well as its susceptibility to attack, reinforcement by another is its indicated recourse. The other type, the more intensive individuality, rather courts, on the other hand, the opposition of others against whose quantitative excess it can preserve its dynamic superiority. Technical grounds, so to speak, will justify this preference: the triple consulate of Napoleon was decidedly more convenient for him than a duality would have been, for he needed to gain 158 men. over only the one colleague (which is very easy for the stronger nature among three) in order to dominate the other; that is, in fact, to dominate the other two in the most legal form. On the whole, it may be said that unions in pairs, as contrasted with those of larger numbers, favor a relatively higher individuality of the participants, while, on the other hand, they presuppose that the restraint of peculiarity through the social articulation to an average level is lacking. If it for that reason is true that women are the less individual sex, that their differentiations vary less from the species type than is on the average the case with men, it would help to explain the further very general opinion that they are, as a rule, less accessible to friendship than are For friendship is a relationship entirely founded upon the individuality of the elements, perhaps even more than marriage, which, through its traditional forms, its social fixities, its real interests, includes much that is super-individual and independent of the peculiarity of the personalities. The fundamental differentiation upon which marriage rests is, in itself, not individual, but it pertains to the species; friendship, however, rests upon a purely personal differentiation, and hence it is intelligible that in general real and permanent friendships are rare at the inferior levels of personal development, and that, on the other hand, the modern highly differentiated woman manifests notably enhanced capacity and inclination for friendships, alike with men and with women. The entirely individual differentiation has, in this case, attained decisiveness over that which pertains to the species, and we thus see the correlation formed between the sharpest individualization and a relation that at this grade is absolutely limited to duality. This, of course, does not prevent the same person from forming at the same time various relations of friendship. That combinations of two in general have, as such, specific traits is shown not merely by the fact that the entrance of a third modifies them entirely, but still more the variously observed fact that the still further extension to four or more by no means modifies the nature of the combination to a correspondingly wide degree. For example, a marriage union resulting in a single child has a quite different character from a childless union, while there is not an equally significant difference between it and the union resulting in two or more children. To be sure, the difference in its essential nature which the second child produces is again much greater than that springing from the arrival of the third. But this simply follows the above rule; for a family with one child is still, in many respects, a relationship between two members; namely, the parents as a unity, on the one hand, the child on the other. The second child is then in fact not merely a fourth, but, sociologically considered, at the same time also a third member in a relationship, and it exerts the peculiar influences of such third members; for within the family, so soon as the actual age of minority is passed, the parents constitute much more frequently a working unity than do the children as a totality. Furthermore, in the realm of the forms of marriage the decisive difference is whether, on the one hand, monogamy prevails, or, on the other, the man has a second wife. If the latter is the case, the third or the twentieth wife is relatively without significance for the structure of the union. Within the boundaries of such a structure, the step to the second wife is here also, at least in one direction, richer in consequences than that to a still larger number, for precisely the duality of wives may give occasion, in the life of the man, to the sharpest conflicts and profoundest perplexities, which, in general, do not arise in the case of each higher number. For in the latter instance such a fundamental declassing and deindividualizing of the wives is involved, there is so decided reduction of the relationship to its sensuous basis (since every more spiritual union is always of a more individual nature), that in general it cannot lead to those profounder disturbances for the man which may flow directly and only from a dual relationship. It is the same fundamental motive which reappears in the assertion of Voltaire about the utility of religious anarchy; that is, two rival sects within a state produce, unavoidably, disturbances and difficulties such as never could arise in the case of two hundred. The meaning which the dualism of the one element in a combination of several members possesses, is, of course, |