« PreviousContinue »
gathering are likewise forms of production. This is true and they are also forms of consumption. It has also been said that all production is only a combination, that is to say, a displacement of elements. This is likewise true, but in gathering, hunting, and fishing consumption and production are still involved in the pre-eminently simple form of a displacement, of a transportation, while in production, properly speaking, there is a new combination of the raw materials which serve to form a new product.
While our logical and dogmatic classification is impregnable when we consider economic phenomena in the abstract, it seems even more valid from the historical and natural point of view, when we consider them in their social forms, in their organization. Thus all the sociologists, including the socialists, point out that the circulatory phenomena of societies, represented by roads, canals, railways, postal systems, telegraphs, telephones, money, credit, banks, are much more advanced in organization and in socialization than the phenomena of production or even of consumption.
There is even one universal organ— the international Postal Union. There are commercial museums. There is a universal code of marine signals, and the same thing is true of music and science. The unity existing in the majority of the treaties of commerce, in the most-favored-nation clause, has the same meaning as international expositions. There is a bibliography planned according to a common method, and even universities with international scope. In addition to all the concordant observations which I have presented elsewhere upon the relative advancement of the circulatory forms, as compared with those of consumption, and especially of production, particularly in my Essais sur la monnaie, la crédit, et les banques, I have found confirmation in this not less interesting fact emphasized by M. Polléans in his creditable book on L'accaparement, viz., that
not only economic facts, but the words for them, have had their evolution. One could not speak of monopoly of production so long as concentration of the means of production did not exist. Speculative or commercial monopoly, which for a long time was the only kind in sight, is entirely eclipsed at
present by the power of productive monopoly (P.7). The legal notion of monopoly [accaparement] is strictly determined by the monopoly of speculation. This is to be explained by the legal code, and by the object which Art. 419 had in view. That article was promulgated at a time when understandings between producers were not yet born. Its intention was to protect freedom of trade and to secure respect for an individualistic conception of the relations of exchange. At that time isolated production on a small scale, divided by competition, was essentially individualistic, and there was nothing to fear except speculative commercial maneuvres (P. 10).
Thus, up to the most recent economic phenomena, the order of formation and of constitution, proceeding from circulation over to production, is confirmed in a constant manner.
We have likewise shown that there is a natural order in production itself; thus industrial production, properly speaking, is much more perfect and in reality more ancient in its social forms than agricultural production. Progress of the first has always preceded that of the second, not merely from the technical point of view, but also from the point of view of socialization. In spite of belief and even appearances to the contrary, industrial production, like agriculture, not merely requires a sufficient development of the mechanical, physical, and chemical sciences, but it also requires a development of biology. So in the countries most advanced in civilization, agriculture, in contrast with manufacture, is still essentially empirical ; it has been of this character to such an extent that its tools, with few exceptions, have been but little modified for centuries. Further, the industrial organization has already assumed much higher social forms; industry has been freed from the feudal régime and from paternal sbsolutism to a much greater extent than agriculture. Yet it may be objected that just as in industry the manufacture of cotton was emancipated before the manufacture of wool, precisely because the former is the more recent, and was therefore established with fewer restrictions, so likewise industry as a whole is more advanced than agriculture, because it is more recent. However, in fact, we encounter a certain development of industry among all peoples, even in cases where there is no agriculture; agriculture is a special differentiation of general industry.
In Part II, we have proceded to a similar classification of the organs and groups of organs: genetic, artistic, scientific, moral,
, juridic, and political. This classification is a second synthesis, at once subjective and objective, for it organizes our knowledge, and at the same time it rests upon observations conforming to concrete reality. One of the most constant laws which we have recognized at this point of our studies is that the social functions and organs thus considered by themselves assume a structure which is less rigid and despotic as their organization becomes more developed and perfect. With evolutionary progress, in the place of order resulting from commandment there is substituted order resulting from the perfecting of the organization itself.
A third positive synthesis, which is still special, shows that the numerous social functions and organs are only the result of sociological differentiation from a primitive homogeneous state, out of which they emerge by way of natural filiation. We have shown that, by the very fact of this filiation, the functions and the organs are related to each other in such a way that the highest forms in each class, and the highest forms of the ensemble of the classes of functions and organs, are interrelated as the divers branches of an immense genealogical tree. Thus the circulatory function, which is the simplest and most general economic function, not only gives rise to a whole series of organs which jointly perform the work of circulation, but it also gives rise to an uninterrupted line of functions and organs relating to consumption, such as private and public markets, wholesale and retail commercial houses, etc., and to an analogous line of functions and organs which participate in the work of production. Further, the economic functions and organs give rise to domestic, artistic, scientific, moral, juridic, and political institutions, all of which are related to the economic functions and organs, and to each other as direct and collateral descendants of common ancestors.
Let us recall, for example, that from the æsthetic point of view a natural classification arises, which is based at the same time
upon the relations of the arts to our senses, to the exterior world, to logic (to which it is related because of their greater or less degree of complexity and speciality), and also to their historical order parallel to their logical order.
The arts concerned with our most general relations with the exterior world, clothing and ornament, the dwelling and architecture, are the simplest. Next come those relating to our senses, beginning with the most general senses, the muscular - the sense of movement and the tactile — from which all the special senses are derived. Harmony of movement was first represented by dances, whose most ordinary manifestations are war dances, pastoral dances, imitations of the hunting of man and of animals, imitations of peaceful occupations and of love. The arts relating to our general sensibility, which is mainly tactile, especially represent the pleasure arising from contact with smooth, soft, and pleasing forms. Then come the arts which are related to our lowest special senses, and which aid in the formation and development of the same—the culinary art, perfumery, etc., which correspond to taste and smell. Moreover, all the special senses are a progressive differentiation of the most general and elementary senses, the muscular and the tactile; they combine the sensation of movement with that of static simultaneity resulting from contact. Hearing and sight are the highest of the senses. They imply movement and touch, which, however, do not necessarily imply sight and hearing. Architecture, sculpture, painting, are the successive forms of art in relation to life. As for music, it is the emotional art par excellence, the highest and the most complex emotional art, in spite of its sentimental diffusion in the nervous system. Literature is the most complex and the most special art, the most precise of the fine arts. Like architecture, it erects the noblest edifices; like sculpture, it creates the most beautiful forms—inorganic, organic, and, above all, humanand gives to each a color living and brilliant or somber or gray as the reality; its language is musical. At the same time, literature serves as a medium and opens to us the highest in ideation and in scientific knowledge, first concrete knowledge, and finally abstract. It embraces in its descriptions all the sensations furnished by the inferior arts, subordinating them in part to the
ideal, just as music does. Music, in spite of its vaguer character, nevertheless also succeeds in represening our most complex sentiments, and in expressing the emotional tonality always inherent even in our most abstract ideas. Literature, with its double instrument, speech and writing, in a word, by means of language, places art in direct relationship with the intellectual aspect of the collective psychology. By means of literature, oral and written language, whose point of departure is gesture and mimicry, and mimetic or picture-writing, whose point of arrival is the apparently purely conventional signs derived from the same, language joins art to science and to the collective intellectual psychology. Language is, then, an eminently social organ. Auguste Comte, in his Static Sociology, has accorded to it an important place, and if, as represented by adverse criticism, I have spoken of it only incidentally in my first two volumes of the Introduction, this was because, in the first place, it seemed to me to be included as a constitutive element in the description, like that above, which I there made of literature; and because, in the second place, to tell the truth, the philosophy of language does not appear to me to be as yet sufficiently elucidated. This second reason is partly, and perhaps wholly, due to the imperfection of my own linguistic attainments, which do not permit me to treat specially this important problem, Besides, from the point of view of the general structure of societies, it is sufficient for me to point out, as I have just done, that literature, both oral and written, is a connective organ joining art to scientific knowledge, which is the essential subject of collective psychology, properly speaking.
So far as collective psychology is concerned (aside from the consideration, too often overlooked, that no social phenomenon, not even an economic phenomenon, is exclusively either material or idealogical, and that, consequently, everything related to sociology, by the very reason of its constitutive factors, is inorganic, organic, and physic), we may accept the grand divisions adopted by Auguste Comte (religion, metaphysics, and positive philosophy) as representing the successive and progressive stages of the co-ordination and the evolution of social psychism.