Auguste Comte - The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte II

8/10/2019 Auguste Comte - The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte II

1/581


2/581

ReligionFor centuries, scripture and theology were the ocus o prodigious amountso scholarship and publishing, dominated in the English-speaking worldby the work o Protestant Christians. Enlightenment philosophy andscience, anthropology, ethnology and the colonial experience all broughtnew perspectives, lively debates and heated controversies to the study o

religion and its role in the world, many o which continue to this day. Tisseries explores the editing and interpretation o religious texts, the history oreligious ideas and institutions, and not least the encounter between religionand science.

Te Positive Philosophy of Auguste ComteTe Positive Philosophy o Auguste Comte is a condensed English versiono the French philosophers controversial work, reely translated by HarrietMartineau and published in two volumes in 1853. Martineaus abridged andmore easily digestible version o Comtes work was intended to be readilyaccessible to a wide general readership, particularly those she elt to bemorally and intellectually adrif, and Comtes philosophy indeed attracteda signicant ollowing in Britain in the later nineteenth century. Comtesdoctrine promoted personal and public ethics and social cohesion basedno longer on metaphysics but on strict scientic method, and anticipatedtwentieth-century logical positivism and secular humanism. Te second volume o this translation is devoted entirely to Comtes new science osocial physics and human progress, and outlines his theories about societyand its development through various phases - theological, humanistic andnally scientic.

C A M B R I D G E L I B R A R Y C O L L E C T I O N

Books of enduring scholarly value


3/581

Cambridge University Press has long been a pioneer in the reissuing oout-o -print titles rom its own backlist, producing digital reprints obooks that are still sought afer by scholars and students but could not bereprinted economically using traditional technology. Te Cambridge LibraryCollection extends this activity to a wider range o books which are still oimportance to researchers and pro essionals, either or the source materialthey contain, or as landmarks in the history o their academic discipline.

Drawing rom the world-renowned collections in the CambridgeUniversity Library, and guided by the advice o experts in each subject area,Cambridge University Press is using state-o -the-art scanning machinesin its own Printing House to capture the content o each book selected orinclusion. Te les are processed to give a consistently clear, crisp image,and the books nished to the high quality standard or which the Pressis recognised around the world. Te latest print-on-demand technologyensures that the books will remain available indenitely, and that orders orsingle or multiple copies can quickly be supplied.

Te Cambridge Library Collection will bring back to li e books o enduringscholarly value (including out-o -copyright works originally issued by otherpublishers) across a wide range o disciplines in the humanities and socialsciences and in science and technology.


4/581

Te PositivePhilosophy o

Auguste ComteV

A C


5/581

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSI Y PRESS

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape own, Singapore,So Paolo, Delhi, Dubai, okyo

Published in the United States o America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.orgIn ormation on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781108001205

in this compilation Cambridge University Press 2009

Tis edition rst published 1853Tis digitally printed version 2009

ISBN 978-1-108-00120-5 Paperback

Tis book reproduces the text o the original edition. Te content and language reectthe belie s, practices and terminology o their time, and have not been updated.

Cambridge University Press wishes to make clear that the book, unless originally publishedby Cambridge, is not being republished by, in association or collaboration with, or

with the endorsement or approval o , the original publisher or its successors in title.


6/581

THE

P O S I T I V E P H I L O S O P H Y

AUGUSTE COMTE.


7/581


8/581

THE

POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY

O F

AUGUSTE COMTE.

FREELY TRANSLATED AND CONDENSED

B Y

HARRIET MARTINEAU.

IN TWO VOLUMES.

VOLUME II.

L O N D O N :

J O H N C H A P M A N , 142 STEAND.

MD LIII


9/581


10/581

CONTENTS.

BOOK VI.

SOCIAL PHYSICS.

CHAPTEE I.NECESSITY AND OPPOBTUNENESS OF THIS NEW SCIENCE

Page

Propo sal of the subject 2Conditions of Ord er and Progress 3

The theological polity 5Criterion of social doctrine 6Fa ilu re of the Theological polity 7The M etaphysical polity 10Becomes obs tructive 12Dogm a of Lib erty of Conscience 13Dogma of Equ ality 16Dogm a of the Sovereignty of the People 17Dogm a of Na tional Independence 18Inconsistency of the Metaphysical doctrine . . . . . 1 8Motion of a state of N atu re 19Adhesion to the worn-out 20Recurrence to war 21Prin cip le of Political Cen tralization 22The Stationary doctrine 25D ang ers of the critical period 28Intellectual anarchy 28

De struction of public mo rality 30Priva te morality 31Political corruption 31Low aims of political questions 36Fa tal to Progress 37Fa tal to Order 38

VOL. I I . b


11/581

Vi CONTENTS.

Page

Incompetence of political leaders o

Advent of the Positive Philosophy 4 1Logical coherence of the doctrine I ts effect on Order ^Its effect on Progress 4 Anarchical tendencies of the scientific class 50Conclusion ***

CHAPTEE II .PRINCIPAL PHILOSOPHICAL ATTEMPTS TO CONSTITUTE

SOCIAL SCIENCE.

History of Social Science 52Aristotle's " Politics" 55Montesquieu 56Condorcet . 5 8Political economy 60Growth of historical study 65

CHAPTEE I II .CHAEACTEBISTICS OF THE POSITIVE METHOD IN ITS APPLICA-

TION TO SOCIAL PHENO MEN A.

Infantile state of social science 68The Relat ive superseding the Absolute . . . . . . 69Presump tuous charac ter of the existing political spirit . . . 7 1

Prevision of social pheno men a 73Spirit of Social Science 74Statical study 75Social O rganization . 75Political and social concurrence 77Interconnect ion of the social organ ism 79O r d e r of statical study 82Dynam ical s tudy 83Social continuity 83

Produced by natu ral laws 84Notion of Human perfect ibi l i ty 87l i m i t s of political action 89Social phenomena modifiable , 90Order of modifying influences 92Means of Invest igat ion in Social Science 95


12/581

CONTENTS. Vl l

Direct M eans 96Observation 96Experiment 100Comparison 101Comparison, with inferior animals 102Comparison of co-existing states of society 103Com parison of consecutive states 105Prom ise of a fourth method of iuvestigation . - . . . 1 1 0

CHAPTER IV.

RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY TO THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS OP

POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY.

Eelation to Biology 112Relation to Inorga nic philosophy 115M an's action on the external world 118Necessary Education 119M athematical preparation 119Pre tended theory of chances 120Reaction of Sociology 121As to doctrine 122As to M ethod 123Speculative ran k of Sociology 125

CHAPTER V.SOCIAL STATICS OR THEORY OF THE SPONTANEOUS ORDER OF

HUMAN SOCIETY.

Three aspects 1271. The Individ ual 1272. The Fam ily 132The Sexual relation 131

The Pa ren tal relation 1373. Society 110Distribu tion of employm ents 142Inconveniences 143Basis of the true theory of government l i tElementary subordination 145Tendency of society to governm ent 147


13/581

Vm CONTENTS.

CHAPTEE VI.

SOCIAL DYNAMICS; OE THEORY OF THE NATURAL PROGRE SS OF

HUMAN SOCIETY.Page

Scientific view of Human Progression 1 9Course of Man's social development 150Rate of progress 151Ennui 1 5 2

D u r a t i o n o f h u m a n l if e . . . . . 1 5 ^I n c r e a s e o f P o p u l a t i o n . . . . . 1 5 4T h e o r d e r o f e v o l u t i o n . . . . . . 1 5 6L a w o f t h e T h r e e P e r i o d s 1 5 8

T h e T h e o l o g i c a l p e r i o d 1 5 9

I n t e l l e c t u a l i n f l u e n c e o f t h e T h e o l o g i c a l p h i l o s o p h y . . . 1 6 1S o c i a l i n f l u e n c e s o f t h e T h e o l o g i c a l p h i l o s o p h y . . . . 1 6 4

I n s t i t u t i o n o f a s p e c u l a t i v e c l a s s . . . . . . . 1 6 6T h e P o s i t i v e s t a ^ e . . . . . . . . . 1 6 7A t t e m p t e d u n i o n o f t h e t w o p h i l o s o p h i e s 1 6 8T h e M e t a p h y s i c a l P e r i o d 1 7 1

C o - e x i s t e n c e o f t h e t h r e e P e r i o d s i n t h e s a m e m i n d . . . 1 7 3

C o r r e s p o n d i n g m a t e r i a l d e v e l o p m e n t 1 7 3

P r i m i t i v e m i l i t a r y l i f e 1 7 4P r i m i t i v e S l a v e r y 1 7 5

T h e M i l i t a r y regime p r o v i s i o n a l 1 7 5

A ff i n i t y b e t w e e n t h e T h e o l o g i c a l a n d M i l i t a r y rSgime . . . 1 7 6A ff i n i t y b e t w e e n t h e P o s i t i v e a n d I n d u s t r i a l s p i r i t . . . 1 7 8I n t e r m e d i a t e regime 1 8 0

CHAPTER VII .

PREPARATION OF THE HISTORICAL QUESTION. EIRST THEO LOGI-

CAL PHASE : FETICHISM.BEGINNING OF THE THEOLOGICAL

AND MILITARY SYSTEM.

Limitations of the analysis . . . . . . . . 1 8 1

Abstract treatment of History . . . . . . . 1 8 3

Abst ract inquiry into laws 184Co-existence of successive states . . . . . . 185Fetichism 186

Startiug-p oint of the huma n race 186

Relation of Fctichism to Morals 190

To Langua ge 190


14/581

CONTENTS. i \

To In te l lec t 191

To Society 192As t ro la t ry 193R e la t io n of F e t icb ism to h u m a n k now ledge . . . . 1 9 1T o th e fine ar ts 195To Ind us t r y 195Po litica l influence 197Ins t i t u t ion of Ag r icul ture 199Prote c t ion to produ cts 200Trans i t ion to Poly the ism 202Th e M etaph ysica l spir i t t raceab le 205

CHAPTER VIII.

SECOND PHASE : PO LYTH EISM.DEV ELOPM ENT OF THE THEOLO-

GICAL A>D MILITARY SYSTEM.

True sense of Polytheism 208It s operation on the human M ind 209Polythe istic Science 210Polytheistic A rt 213Polytheistic Ind ustr y 220Social attribu tes of Polytheism 221Polity of Polytheism 221Worship 223Civilization by W a r 223

Sacerdotal sanctions 225Two characteristics of the polity 226Slavery 226Concentration of spiritual and tem poral power . . . . 228M orality of Polytheism 231M ora l effects of Slavery 231Subordination of morality to polity 232Personal morality w . . 234Social morality 234Dom estic morality 235Th ree phases of Polythe ism 236The Eg yptian , or theocratic 237Caste 237Th e Greek, or intellectual 241Science 243Philosophy 245

o 3


15/581

C O N T E N T S .

Page 4 6

The Roman, or Military

ConquestMoralityIntellectual developmentPreparation for monotheismThe Jews . 253

CHAPTER IX.

4G E OP MONOTHEISM. MOD IFICATION OP THE THEOLOGICAL ANDMILITARY SYSTEM.

C a t h o l i c i s m , t h e f o r m 2 5 6P r i n c i p l e o f p o l it i c a l r u l e 2 5 7T h e g r e a t p r o b l e m . . . . . . . . . 2 6 0S e p a r a t i o n o f s p i r i t u a l a n d t e m p o r a l p o w e r 2 6 1F u n c t i o n o f e a c h . . . . . . . . . . 2 6 3T h e s p e c u l a t i v e c l a s s . . . , . . . . . 2 6 3

T h e C a t h o l i c s y s t e m 2 6 4E c c l e s i a s t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . . . . . . . . 2 6 6E l e c t i v e p r i n c i p l e . . . . . . . . . . 2 6 6M o n a s t i c I n s t i t u t i o n s 2 6 7S p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n o f t h e c l e r g y 2 6 7R e s t r i c t i o n o f i n s p i r a t i o n . . . . . . . . 2 6 8E c c l e s i a s t i c a l c e l i b a c y 2 6 9Te m p o r a l s o v e r e i g n t y o f t h e P o p e s . . . . . . 2 7 0E d u c a t i o n a l f u n c t i o n 2 7 2

D o g m a t i c c o n d i t i o n s . . . . . . . . . 2 7 4D o g m a o f ex c l u s i v e s a l v a t i o n 2 7 5O f t h e F a l l o f M a n 2 7 6O f P u r g a t o r y . . . . . , 2 7 6O f C h r i s t ' s d i v i n i t y . . . 2 7 6O f t h e R e a l P r e s e n c e 2 7 7" Wo r s h i p 2 7 7S i g n i f i c a n c e o f c o n t r o v e r s i e s 2 7 7Te m p o r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e regime 2 7 8T h e G e r m a n i c i n v a s i o n s 2 7 8B i s e o f D e f e n s i v e s y s t e m 2 7 9O f t e r r i t o r i a l i n d e p e n d e n c e 2 8 0S l a v e r y c o n v e r t e d i n t o s e r f a g e . " o i

I n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e C h u r c h t h r o u g h o u t . of i lI n s t i t u t i o n o f c h i v a l r y . . . . o o o

J1O


16/581

CONTENTS. Xi

PageOpe ra t ion of th e F eu da l sys tem 284

Moral aspect of the rSgime 284Ris e of M or al i t y over Po li ty 285Sou rce of m or al influence of Catho licism 286M ora l types 289Pers ona l mo ra l i ty un de r Catholic ism 290Domes t i c 291Social 292Intel lectual aspect of the rSgime 294Phi losophy 295Science 296A r t . . . . 297I n d u s t r y 2 9 8Provis ional na ture of the rSgime 299D ivision be tw een N at u r a l an d M ora l philosophy . . . . 300Th e ^Metaphysical spirit 300Tem poral decl ine 302Conclusion 303

CHAPTEE X.

METAPHYSICAL STATE, AND CEITICAL PEEIOD OP MODEKST SOCIETY.

C onduct of th e in q u i ry . . . . . . . . 304N eces si ty of a t rans i t ion al s tate 305I t s com m encem ent . . . . . . . . . 306

Div ision of th e critical peri od 308Causes of spon taneou s decl ine 308De cline un de r nega t ive doctr ine 310Ch arac ter of th e provisional phi losophy 311Ch rist ian perio d of th e doctr ine 312De ist ical perio d 312Or gan s of th e doctr ine 314Scholast icism 315Th e Legis ts 316

Pe rio d of spon taneou s spir i tua l decl ine 317S pon taneous tem p o ra l decline . . . . . . . 319Tr ue cha racte r of the .Reformation 321Th e Jesu i t s 323F in al decay of Catholicism 324Vices of Pr ote s tan t i sm 325Te m po ral dicta torsh ip . . . 326


17/581

CONTENTS.

Page007

Eoyal and Aristocrat ic

Eise of Ministerial function 3 2 9

Military decline 8 3 Ei se of Diplom atic function 332Intel lec tual inf luence of Pro testan t ism 333Catholic share in Pro tes tan t resul ts 336Jansenism T Quiet ism 336M oral Influence of Prote stant ism . . 337Th ree stages of dissolution 339Lutheranism 339Calvinism 339Socinian ism . . . . . . . . .. . 33 9Quaker ism 340Political revolutions of Pro tes tan tism 340Hol land ; En gla nd ; America 340, 341Atte nda nt errors 342Subjection of spir itual pow er . .. . . . . 342Moral .changes under Protes tant i sm 344Stag e of full develop men t of th e Critica l doc trine . . . 345Pro testa ntism opposed to progress . . . . . 346T he negative philosophy . . . . . . . . 347Th ree periods of the negative philosop hy 349Systematized 350Hobbes 350It s intellectual character 350I t s m o ra l c ha ra cte r . . 3 5 1It s pol it ical character . . . . . , . . . 3 5 2

It s propagation 353School of Yo ltaire 353I t s politic al action . . . . , . , m . 3 5 8School of Eou sseau 35gThe EconomistsAttendant evi ls

CHAPTER XI.

EISE OF THE ELEMENTS 03? THE P OSITIVE STATE. PREP ARA TIONEOR SOCIAL REORGANIZATION.

Da te of mod ern history E ise of new, elem ents * ^A

P h i l o s o p h i c a l o r d e r o f e m p l o y m e n t s . 3 6 5C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . . . ~n~


18/581

CONTENTS. Xl l l

Order of succession 367T H E INDUSTRIAL MOVEM ENT 369Birth of political liberty 373Characteristics of the Indu stri al movem ent 374Personal effect 374Domestic effect 375Social effect 376Ind ust rial policy 378Relation to Catholicism 379Relation to the temporal authority 379Administration 380Thre e periods 380Pa id armies 381Rise of public credit 381Political alliances 382Mechanical inventions 382The Compass Fire-arms ; Prin ting 382, 383M aritim e discovery . . . . . . . . . 385

Second period . . . . . . . . . . 385Colonial system 387Slavery 388Third period 389Fina l subordination of the M ilitary spirit 389Spread of Ind ustr y 390T H E INTELLECTUAL MOV EMEN T 392The aesthetic development 392Inte llectu al Originality 394Relation of A rt to Industry . . . . . . . 396Critical charac ter of A rt 398Re trograd e character 399Relation of A rt to politics 401Spread of A rt 404Th e scientific development 405Ne w bir th of science 406Relation to Monotheism 407

A strolo gy ; Alchemy 410F ir st modern phase of progress 412Second phase 413Filiation of discoveries 415Rela tion of science to old philosophy 415Galileo . 416Social relations of science 417


19/581

xiv CONTENTS.

Page

Third phase 4 1 8

Eelations of Discoveries 419Stage of speciality 420The philosophical development 421Eeason and Fai th 421Bacon and Descartes . 424Political philosophy 427The Scotch School 428Political philosophy 428Idea of Progression . . . 429Gaps to be supplied 430In Industry 430In Art 432In Philosophy 432In Science 433Existing needs 433

CHAPTER XII.

REVIEW OF THE REVOLUTIONARY CRISIS .A SCER TAINM ENT OF

THE FINAL TENDENCY OF MODERN SOCIETY.

F r a n c e first r e v o l u t i o n i z e d 4 3 4P r e c u r s o r y e v e n t s . . . . . . . . . 4 3 5F i r s t s t a g e T h e C o n s t i t u e n t A s s e m b l y . . . . . 4 3 6S e c o n d s t a g e T h e N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n 4 3 7A l l i a n c e o f f o e s 4 3 8

C o n s t i t u t i o n a l a t t e m p t . . . . . . . . 4 4 1M i l i t a r y a s c e n d a n c y 4 4 1N a p o l e o n B o n a p a r t e . . . . . . . . . 4 4 2R e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e B o u r b o n s . . . . . . . 4 4 4F a l l o f t h e B o u r b o n s 4 4 5T h e n e x t r e i g n 4 4 ( 3E x t e n s i o n o f t h e m o v e m e n t . . . . 4 4 7C o m p l e t i o n o f t h e T h e o l o g i c a l d e c a y . . . . . . 4 4 8D e c a y o f t h e M i l i t a r y s y s t e m 4 5 0

H e c e n t I n d u s t r i a l p r o g r e s s . . . . . . 4 5 3R e c e n t J E s t h e t i c p r o g r e s s . . . . .R e c e n t S c i e n t i f i c p r o g r e s s 4 5 5

A b u s e s < 457Recent Philosophical progress 4^0The law of evolution . in -

. 4o5


20/581

CONTENTS. XV

Specula t ive prepara t ion

The sp i r i tua l au thor i tyI t s Educat ional funct ionR e g e n e r a t i o n of M o r a l i tyI n t e r n a t i o n a l d u t yBasis of A s s e n tThe Tempora l au thor i tyPub l i c and pr iv ate funct ion . . . .Pr inc ip le of co-ordinat ionSpeculat ive classes highest . . . . .The Pract ical classesPr iv i leges and comp ensat ions . . . .Pract ica l pr ivacyPract ical freedomPopular c la imsReciprocal effectsPrepa ra to ry s t ageP r o m o t i o n of O r d e r and P r o g r e s s

Na t iona l pa r t i c ipa t ionF r a n c e ; I t a l y ; G e r m a n y ; E n g l a n d ; S p ai nCo-operat ion of T h i n k e r sS u m m a r y of r e su l t s und er th e Sociological theory

Page

. 466

. 467

. 473

. 474

. 475

. 477

. 478

. 479

. 480

. 481

. 482

. 482

. 484

. 485

. 485

. 487

. 488. 489

. 491492-494

. 495

. 495

CHAPTER XIII.

FINAL ESTIMATE OF TIIE POSITIVE METH OD.

Principle of UnityWhich element shall prevailFirst general ConclusionThe Mathematical element .The Sociological elementSolves antagonismsSpirit of the Method .Nature of the Method

Inquiry into lawsAccordance with common senseConception of Natural lawsLogical method .Scientific methodStability of opinions .Destination of the Method .

497498498500503507510511

511512513516517519520


21/581

XVI CONTENTS.

Page

The Individual 5 2

T h e E a c e 5 2 1

Speculative life 5 2 2

Prac tical life 523

Libe rty of method 524

Exten sion of the positive meth od 525

Ab str act of concrete Science 526

Relations of phases . . . . . . 5 2 8

Mathematics 528

Astronomy . . . . . . . . . . . 529Physics and Chemistry 530

Biology 531

Sociology 532

CHAPTER XIV.

ESTIMATE OF THE BESULTS OF POSITIVE DOCTRINE IN ITS

PREPARATORY STAGE.

T h e M a t h e m a t i c a l e l e m e n t 5 3 6A p p l i c a t i o n t o S o c i o l o g y 5 3 7T h e A s t r o n o m i c a l e l e m e n t . . . . . . . . 5 3 9T h e P h y s i c a l 5 4 0T h e C h e m i c a l 5 4 2T h e B i o l o g i c a l 5 4 3The Soc io log ica l 54 5

CHAPTEE XV.ESTIMATE OF THE FINAL ACTION OF THE P O S IT I V E P H I L O S O P H Y.

T h e s c i e n t i f i c a c t i o n 5 4 9

A b s t r a c t s p e c u l a t i o n . . . . . . 5 5 0C o n c r e t e r e s e a r c h 5 5 ^

T h e m o r a l a c t i o n . . . . . . . . . 5 5 2P e r s o n a l m o r a l i t y 5 5 3

D o m e s t i c m o r a l i t y . . . . 5 5 jS o c i a l m o r a l i t y 5 5 4

P o l i t i c a l a c t i o n . . . . . . 5 5 ^D o u b l e g o v e r n m e n t ^ Q

T h e s e s t h e t i c a c t i o n 5 5 0

T h e F i v e N a t i o n s . . . r / M


22/581

TIIE

P O S I T I V E P H I L O S O P H Y

OF

A U G U S T E C O M T E .

BOOK VI.S O C I A L P H Y S I C S .

CHAPTER I .

NECESSITY AND OPPOKTUNENESS OF THIS NEW SCIENCE.

N the five foregoing parts of th is work, ou r investigationproceeded on an ascertained and undisputed scientific basis;and our business was to exhibit the progress made in eachscience ; to free it from en tang lem ent with the an cient philo-sophy ; and to show what further improvem ents m ight be an-ticipa ted. O ur task is a different, and a m uch harde r one, inth e case of th e sixth and last science th at I am about to tre at of.Th e theo ries of Social science are still, even in the m inds ofthe best thinkers, completely implicated with the theologico-metaph ysical ph iloso phy; and are even supposed to be, by afatal separation from all other science, condemned to remainso involved for ever. Th e philosophical procedure wh ich Ihave undertaken to carry through becomes more difficult and

bold, from thi s po int onwards, w ithou t a t all chan ging itsna tu re or ob ject; and it m ust so far present a new characteras it m us t henceforth be em ployed in creating a wholly neword er of scientific concep tions, instead of jud gin g, arra ng ing ,and improving such as already existed.

V O L I I B


23/581

2 POSITIVE PHILO SOPH Y.

I t is not to be expected th at this new science can be at onceraised to a level with even the most imperfect of those whichwe have been reviewing. All that can be ration ally proposedin our day is to recognize th e character of positivity in socialas in all other science, and to ascertain the chief bases onwhich it is founded; bu t this is enough, as I hope to show, tosatisfy our most urgent intellectual necessities, and even themost imperative needs of imm ediate social prac tice. I n itsscientific connection with the rest of this work, all that I canhope to do is to exhibit the general considerations of the case,

so as to resolve the intellectual anarchy whichProposal of jg t k e m a i n s o u r c e of o u r moral anarchy first,the subject. a n d t h e n o f p o l i t i c a^ ^ i c h j shall treatof only through its originating causes. The extrem e noveltyof such a doctrine and method renders it necessary, beforeentering upon the immediate subject, to set forth the im-portance of such a procedure, and the futility of th e chiefattempts which have been indirectly made to investigate socialscience. However unquestionable may be the need of such

science, and the obligation to discover it, the best minds havenot yet attained a point of view from which they can estimateits depth and breadth and true position. In its nascen t stateevery science is implicated w ith its corresponding a r t ; an dremains implicated with it, as we have seen, the longer in pro -portion to the complexity of the phenom ena concerned. Ifbiological science, which is more advanced than social, is stilltoo closely connected with the medical art, as we have seenthat it is, we cannot be surprised that men are insensible tothe value of all social speculations which are not immediatelyconnected with practical affairs. W e cannot be surprised a tany obstinacy in repelling them , as long as it is supposed th atby rejecting them , society is preserved from chimerical andmischievous schemes: though experience has abundantlyshown that the precaution has never availed, and th at it doesnot now prevent our being daily invaded by the most illusoryproposals on social m atte rs. I t is in deference to as m uch asis reasonable in this apprehension that I propose to state, first,how the institution of a science of Social Physics bears uponthe principal needs and grievances of society, in its presen tdeplorable state of anarchy. Such a represe ntation may per-haps convince men worthy of the name of statesmen thatthere is a real and eminent utility in labours of this kind,


24/581

EX ISTIN G STATE OF SOCIETY. 3

worthy of the anxious attention of men who profess to devotethemselves to the task of resolving th e alarm ing revolution aryconstitution of modern societies.

F ro m the po int of view to which we have been raised byour study of the preceding sciences, we are able to survey thesocial situation of our own time in its fullest extent andbroadest li g h t; and wh at we see is th at th ere is a deep andwidely-spread anarchy of the whole intellectual system, whichhas been in this state of disturbance during the long inter-regnum, resulting from the decline of the theologico-metaphy-

sical philosophy. A t the present tim e, the old philosophy isin a state of im becility; while the development of the positivephilosophy, though always proceeding, has not yet been bold,broad, and general enough to comprehend the m ental govern-m ent of th e hum an race. W e m ust go back through tha t inter-reg nu m to und erstand truly the p resent floating and contra-dictory state of all great social ideas, and to perceive howsociety is to be delivered from the p eril of dissolution, andbrought under a new organization, more consistent and moreprogressive than that which once rested on the theologicalphilosophy. W hen we have duly observed the powerlessnessof conflicting political schools, we shall see the necessity ofintroducing an entirely new spirit into the organization ofsociety, by which these useless and passionate struggles may beput an end to, and society led out of the revolutionary statein which it has been tossed about for three centuries past.

The ancients used to suppose Order and Pro- Conditions ofgress to be irrecon cilab le: b ut both are indispen- Order andsable conditions in a state of modern civilization; Prgres9-and their combination is at once the grand difficulty and them ain resource of every genu ine political system. N o real ordercan be estab lished , and still less can it last, if it is n ot fullycom patible with pro gre ss: and no great progress can be ac-complished if it does not tend to the consolidation of order.Any conception which is so devoted to one of these needs as

to prejudice the other, is sure of rejection, sooner or later, asm istak ing th e na tu re of the political problem . Therefore, inpositive social science, the chief feature must be the union ofthe se two conditions, which will be two aspects, con stant andinsepa rable, of th e same principle. Th roug hou t the wholeran ge of science, thu s far, we have seen th at the conditions

B 2


25/581

4 POSITIVE PHILOS OPHY .

of combination and of progress are originally id en tic al: and Itrust we shall see, after looking into social science in the sameway, that ideas of Order and Progress are, in Social Physics,as rigorously inseparable as the ideas of Organization andLife in Biology ; from whence indeed they are, in a scientificview, evidently derived.

The misfortune of our actual state is that the two ideas areset up in radical opposition to each other,the retrogradespirit having directed all efforts in favour of Order, andanarchical doctrine having a rrogated to itself the charge of

Social Progress; and, in this state of things , the reproachesexchanged between the respective pa rties are only too wellmerited by bo th. In this vicious circle is society now con-fined ; and the only issue from it is by the undisputed prepo n-derance of a doctrine equally progressive and hierarchical.The observations which I have to make on thi s subject areapplicable to all Eu ropean societies, which have, in fact, allundergone a common disorganization, though in different de-grees, and with various modifications, and which cannot be

separately reorganized, however the y may be for a tim e re -strained ; but I shall keep the French nation chiefly in view,not only because the revolutionary state has been most con-spicuous in them , but because they are, in all im po rtant re -spects, bette r prepared, in spite of appearances, th an any o ther,for a true reorganization.

Among the infinite variety of political ideas which appearto be striving in society, there are in fact only two orders, themingling of which in various proportions occasions the appa-rent multiplicity and of these two, the one is really only thenegation of the other. If we wish to unders tand our* owncondition, we m ust look at it as th e resu lt and las t te rm ofthe general conflict und ertaken, for thre e cen turies past, forthe gradual demolition of the old political system. So rega rd-ing it, we see tha t whereas, for above half a centu ry, the i rre -mediable decay of the old system has proved the necessitv offounding a new one, we have not been sufficiently aware ofthe need to have formed an original and direct conception,adequate to the pu rpo se; so tha t our theoretical ideas haveremained inferior to our practical necessities, which, in ahealthy state of the social organism , they hab itually an tici-pate, to p repare for the ir regular and peaceable satisfaction.Though the political movem ent could not bu t have changed


26/581

ANTAGONISM OF PR INC IPLE S. 5

its nature, from that time forward, becoming organic insteadof critical, yet, for w ant of a basis in science, it has p roceededon th e same old ideas tha t had actuated the past st ru g gl e;and we have w itnessed th e spectacle of defenders and assailantsalike endeavouring to convert their old weapons of war intoinstruments of reorganization, without suspecting the inevit-able failure which m ust ensue to bo th partie s. Such is thestate th at we find ourselves in now. A ll ideas of orde r in th epolitical world are derived from the old doctrine of the theo-logical and military system, regarded especially in its catholic

and feudal constitution a doctrine which from our point ofview in th is work, repre sents the theological state of socialscience: and, in the same way, all ideas of progress are stillderived from the purely nega tive philosophy which, issuingfrom pro testan tism , assumed its final form and developmentin the last century, and which, applied to social affairs, con-stitu tes th e metaphysical state of politics. Th e differentclasses of society range themselves on the one side or theother, according to the ir inclination for conservatism or amelio-ra tio n. W it h every new up rising of a social difficulty, we seethe retrograde school proposing, as the only certain and uni-versal rem edy , th e restoration of the corresponding pa rt ofth e old political system ; and the critical school referring th eevil exclusively to the destruction of the old system not beingcom plete. W e do no t often see th e two doctrines presen tedwitho ut modification. They so exist only in purely speculativem inds . B ut when we see them in mo nstrous alliance, as wedo in all degrees of existing political opinion, we cannot butknow tha t such an alliance cannot yield any virtue which itseleme nts do not contain, and th at it can only exhibit theirm utu al neutralization. W e m ust h ere, it is clear, regard thetheological a nd th e m etaphysical polities separately, in thefirst place, th at we m ay afterwards understand their presen tantagonism, and form an estimate of the futile combinationsinto which men have endeavoured to force them.

Pernicious as the theological polity may be in

our day, no true philosopher will ever forget thatit afforded the beneficent guardianship underwhich the formation and earliest development of modern so-cieties took place. B u t it is equally incon testable that, forthree centuries past, its influence among the most advancednations has been essentially retrograde, notwithstanding some


27/581

6 POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY.

partial services. W e need no t go in to any discussion of itsdoctrine, in order to ascertain its powerlessness for future ser-vice for it is plain that a polity tha t could no t hold its groundbefore the natural progress of intelligence and of society cannever again serve as a basis of social orde r. The historicalanalysis which I shall have to offer of the causes that havedissolved the Catholic and feudal system will show, better thanany argument, how radical and irretrievable is the decay.The theological school explains the fact, as far as it can, byfortuitous and, we might almost say, personal causes: and,when they will no longer suffice, resorts to its common suppo-sition, of a mysterious caprice of Prov idence which has allo ttedto social order a season of probation, of which no accountcan be given, either as to its date or its duration, or even itscharacter. A contemplation of historical facts however showsthat all the great successive modifications of the theologicaland military system have, from the beginning and increasingly,tended to the complete elimination of a regime which, by thefundamental law of social evolution, could never be more than

provisional, however indispensab le. And if any efforts torestore the system could achieve a temporary success, theywould not bring back society to a normal state, but wouldmerely restore the very situation which compelled the revolu-tionary crisis, by obliging it to set about the work of destruc-tion again, with more violence, because the regime has alto-gether ceased to be compatible with progress in the mostessential respects. W hile avoiding all controversy on so plaina case, I must briefly present a new view which appears to

me to point out th e simplest and surest criterion of the valueof any social doctrine, and which emphatically condemns thetheological polity.

Regarded from the logical point of view, theCriterion of problem of our social reo rganization seem s tosocial doctrine. l -, . , x 1 .

&v , . , ,

me reducible to this one condition: to constructrationally a political doctrine which, in the whole of its activedevelopment, shall be always fully consequent on its own prin-

ciples. N o existing doctrines approach to a fulfilment of thi scondition: all contain, as indispensable elements, numerousand direct contradictions on the greater number of importantpoints. I t may be laid down as a principle th at t he doctrinewhich furnishes accordant solutions on the various leadingquestions of polity, without failing in this one respect in the


28/581

TH E THEOLOGICAL POLIT Y. 7

course of application, m ust, by this indire ct test alone, be re-cognized as sufficiently adapted to reorganize society; sincethis intellectual reorganization must mainly consist in re-esta-blishing harmony in the troubled system of our social ideas.When such a regeneration shall have been accomplished in anindividual mind (and in that way it must begin), its generali-zation, sooner or later, is secure; for the number of mindscannot increase the difficulty of the intellectual convergence,but only defer the success. W e shall hereafter find how greatis th e superiority of th e positive philosophy in this view; be-

cause, once extended to social phenomena, it must connect thedifferent orders of human ideas more completely than couldbe done in any other way.

The accomplishment of this great logical con- 1 ^ ^ of thedition might be expected from the theological theologicalpolity above all others, because its doctrine is Polity-limited to co-ordinating a system so clearly defined by its longapplication, and so folly developed in all its essential parts,that it may well be supposed secure from all serious incon-sistency. Th e retro gra de school accordingly extols habitually,as its charac teristic attr ibu te, the perfect coherence of its ideas,in contrast with the contradictions of the revolutionary school.Yet, though the theological polity is less inconsistent than themetaphysical, it shows a daily increasing tendency to conces-sions of the most radical importance, directly contrary to allits essential principles. Th is is evidence enough of the futilityof a doctrine which does not even possess the one quality mostspontaneously correspondent to its na ture . Th e old politicalsystem is seen to be destroyed as soon as its most devoted ad-herents have lost the true general sentiment of it: and thismay now be observed, not only in active practice, but amongpurely speculative m inds of a high order, which a re uncon-sciously modified by the irresistible influences of the ir age . Ifexamples are desired, we need only bring the retrograde doc-trine into comparison with the elements of modern civiliza-tion . Th ere can be no doubt th at the development of the

sciences, of industry, and even of the fine arts, was h istoricallythe principal, though latent cause, in the first instance, of theirretrievable decline of the theological and military system.At present, it is the ascendency of the scientific spirit whichpreserves us from any real restora tion of the theological s pir it;as, again, the industrial spirit, in its perpetual extension, con-


29/581

8 POSITIVE PHILOSOPH Y.

stitutes our best safeguard against any serious recur ren ce ofthe military or feudal spirit. W hateve r m ay be th e nam esgiven to our political struggles, this is the real character ofour social antagonism. Now , amidst this state of th ings , dowe hear of such a thin g as any governm ent, or even any schoo l,seriously proposing a systematic repression of science, ind us tryand art ? Do not all powers (with an eccentric exception hereand there) claim the honour of encouraging the ir progress ?Here we have the first inconsistency of the retrograde polity,annulling its own project of a restoration of the past: andthough the inconsistency is less apparent than some others, itm ust be regarded as the most decisive of all, because it is m oreuniversal and more instinctive than any other. NapoleonBonaparte himself, the hero of retrogression in our time, sethimself up , in all sincerity, as the protec tor of industry, ar t,and science. Pu rely speculative minds, thou gh more easilyseparating themselves from any prevalent tendency, have es-caped no better from th e influence of their times. How m anyhave been the attempts, for instance, for two centuries past,

on the part of some of the most eminent minds, to subordi-nate reason to faith, according to the theological formula;reason itself being made the supreme judge of such a submis-sion, and thu s evidencing the contradictory character of th eproposition The most eminent thinke r of the Catholicschool, the illustrious De Ma istre, bore involuntary testimo nyto the necessity of his time when he endeavoured, in his prin-cipal work, to re-establish th e papal supremacy on histor icaland political reasonings, instead of ordaining it by divine r ight ,

which is the only ground appropriate to such a doctrine, andthe only ground he would have proposed in any age but onein which the general state of intelligence precluded such a plea.Instances like these may spare us further illustration.

As for more direct inconsistencies, more strik ing , thoughless profound, and comprehended within the present times,we see in every sect of the retrograde school a direct opposi-tion to some fundamental part of their common doctrine.Perhaps the only point on which there is now any unanimityin that school is in the consent to break up the very basis ofthe catholic and feudal system, by surrendering the divisionbetween the spiritual and temporal power; or, what comes tothe same thing, acquiescing in the subordination of the spiri-tual to the temporal authority. In this respect, the kings are


30/581

FATAL DIVISION S. 9

showing themselves as revolutionary as the ir peoples; and th epriests have ratified their own degradation, in catholic coun-tries no less th an prote stan t. If their desire is to resto re th eold system, their first step must be to unite the innumerablesects which have sprung out of the decline of C hri stia nity :but every attempt of the sort has failed through the blind andobstinate determination of the governments to retain the su-preme direction of the theological power, the centralization ofwh ich the y th us render impossible. Napoleon only showedan exaggerated copy, in his violent inconsistencies, of what

many princes had done before him : and after his fall, whenthe sovereigns of Europe united to set up a power in opposi-tion to revolutionary tendencies, they usurped the a ttributesof the old spiritual authority, and exhibited the spectacle ofa high council composed of heretic chiefs, and governed by aschism atic prince. After this , it was manifestly impossible tointroduce the papal power into the alliance, in any way what-ever. Such instances of the postponement of religious prin -ciples to temporal convenience are not new; but they showhow th e m ain idea of th e old political system has ceased topreponderate in the minds of the very persons who undertookto restore it. The divisions in the retrog rade school have beenof late apparent under all circumstances, whether of successor defeat. A ny tem pora ry success oug ht to rally all dissen-tien ts, in a school which boasts of the u nity of its doc trine :yet, through a long course of years we have witnessed suc-cessive, and more and more serious schisms am ong the subdi-

visions of the triu m ph an t pa rty. Th e advocates of Catholicismand those of feudality have quarrelled and the la tter have splitinto partisa ns of aristocracy and defenders of royalty. U nd erthe completest restored supremacy, the schisms would onlybreak ou t again, with m ore violence, throu gh the incom pati-bility of the existing social state with the old political system.The vague assent to its general principles which is yielded ina speculative sense, must give way in their application; andevery prac tical development mu st engen der further divisions :and this is the scientific description of any theory which isincompatible with the facts.

When the retrograde party is reduced to the rank of anopposition, it has recourse to the principles of the revolu-tina ry do ctrine. Th is has been the case repeatedly duringhe last three centuries, when that party has been put upon the

B 3


31/581

1 0 POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY.

defensive. Thu s we see the Catholics in E ng land, and yetmore in Ireland, asserting the claim of liberty of conscience,while still clamouring for th e repression of Pro testantism inFran ce, Austria, and elsewhere. Again, when th e sovereignsof Europe invoked the aid of the peoples to put down Napo-leon, they surrendered their retrograde doctrine, and testifiedto the power of the critical, as that which was really influenc-ing civilized society, even though they were proposing, all thewhile, to effect the restora tion of the ancien t po lity. W ehave seen something even more wonderful since th at strug gle .We have seen the retrograde party taking possession of thewhole body of critical doctrine, endeavouring to system atizeit for its own uses, and sanctioning all its anarchical conse-quences ; trying to set up the catholic and feudal regime bythe very means which have destroyed i t ; and believing tha t amere change in the person of the sovereign would interceptthe consequences of a political movement which they haddone noth ing to modify*. This is simply a new way of sign -ing a political abdication, however the ability of those who do

it may be extolled.W e need no t look furthe r for illu stra -tions of the pregnant fact th at a polity which is th e type ofun ity and permanence has been full of schisms, and now con-tains elements directly incompatible with its fundam ental prin -ciples ; and tha t, as when we find De M aistre reproach ingBossuet with mistaking the nature of Catholicism, and thenhimself falling into inconsistencies, the party of Order is pro-posing to re-establish that which is not comprehended by itsmost illustrious defenders.

Tu rning now to the M etaphysical polity, wesical poUty i n n s t first observe and carefully remem ber tha t its

doctrine, though exclusively critical, and there-fore revolutionary, has still always had the virtue of beingprogressive, having, in fact, superintended the chief politicalprogress accomplished during the last three centuries, whichmust be, in the first instance, essentially negative. What thisdoctrine had to do was to break up a system which, hav ingdirected the early growth of the human mind and society,tended to protract that infantile period: and thus, the politi-cal triumph of the metaphysical school was a necessary pre-paration for the advent of the positive school, for which the

^ s w r i t t c n d u r i nS t h e r e ign of Louis Philippe, and tlie administra-tion of M. Guizot.


32/581

THE METAPHYSICAL POLITY. 1 1

task is exclusively reserved of terminating the revolutionaryperiod by the formation of a system uniting Order with Pro-gress. Th oug h the metaphysical system, considered by itself,presents a character of direct anarchy, an historical view of it,such as we shall take hereafter, shows that, considered in itsorigin, and in its antagonism to the old system, it constitutesa necessary provisional state, and must be dangerously activetill the new political organization which is to succeed it isready to put an end to its agitations.

The passage from one social system to another can never

be con tinuo us and direct. Th ere is always a trans itional stateof anarchy which lasts for some generations at least; andlasts the longer the more complete is the renovation to bewrought. The best political progress that can be made duringsuch a period is in gradually dem olishing the former system,th e foundations of w hich had been sapped before. W hile th isinevitable process is going on, the elements of the new systemare taking form as political institutions, and the reorganiza-tion is stimulated by the experience of the evils of anarchy.Th ere is anoth er reason why the constitution of the newsystem cannot take place before the destruction of the old;that without that destruction no adequate conception couldbe formed of what m us t be done . Sh ort as is our life, andfeeble as is our reason, we cannot emancipate ourselves fromthe influence of ou r env ironm ent. Even the wildest dream ersreflect in their dreams the contemporary social state: andmuch more impossible is it to form a conception of a true

political system, radically different from that amidst which welive. Th e highest order of m inds cannot discern the charac-teristics of the coming period till they are close upon i t ; andbefore that, the incrustations of the old system will have beenpre tty m uch broken away, and the popular mind will havebeen used to the spectacle of its dem olition. The stron gesthead of all an tiqu ity is an example of th is. Aristotle couldnot conceive of a state of society that was not founded onslavery, the irrevocable abolition of which took place somecen turies after him .Th ese considerations are illustrative ofour ow n tim es, for which all former tra nsition periods werem erely a prepara tion. N ever before was the destined renova-tion so extensive and so thorough; and never before, there-fore, was the critical preparatory period so protracted and soperilou s. Fo r th e first tim e in the history of the world, th erevolutionary action is attached to a complete doctrine of me-


33/581


thodical negation of all regular government. Such being theorigin of the existing critical doctrine, we can explain the ser-vices which tha t doctrine has hith erto rendered, and the ob-stacles which it now opposes to the reorganization of modernsociety. W e shall see hereafter how each of its princip aldogmas has sprung out of some corresponding decay in th eold social order; a decay which then proceeded all the fasterfor the opposition having become a dogma. Th e m isfortuneof the case lies in the doctrine which was thu s necessarilyrelative to the old system coming by degrees to be supposedabsolu te: bu t we may leave it to those who desire it toblame the political conduct of our fathers, Avithout whoseenergetic perseverance we should not have found ourselves atour present stage of progress, or have been able to conceiveof th e be tter polity that is approaching. Th e absolute or m e-taphysical spirit was necessary to direct the formation of thecritical and anti-theological doctrine, which needed all possibleenergy to overthrow th e great ancient system ; and this energycould no otherwise be imparted to th e dogmas of the criticalphilosophy. The necessity and the fact of the case are ob -vious enough : bu t not the less must we deplore the conse-quence,that the energy imparted to the anarchical princi-ple has gone on to impede the institution of the very politicalorder for which it came to prepare th e way. W he n, in thenatural course of events, any doctrine has become hostile tothe purposes it was destined to serve, it is evidently donewith and its end, or the close of its activity, is near. W ehave seen that the retrograde or theological polity has become

as disturbing as the m etaphysical or rev olu tion ary : if we findalso that the latter, whose office was to aid progress, has be-come obstructive, it is clear that both doctrines are worn out,and must soon be replaced by a new philosophy.This condi-tion of the metaphysical polity is a matter so serious that wemust dwell upon it a little, to see how so provisional an influ-ence can have produced the appearance of a new and stablesystem.

The spirit of revolutionary polity is to erect into a perma-nency the temporary action which it prom pts. Fo r instance,being in antagonism with ancient order, its tendency is to re-

present all governm ent as being the enem y of8 S

0 " s o c i e t ^ a n d t h e d u ty o f society to be to keep upa perpetual suspicion and vigilance, restricting

the activity of government more and more, in order to guard


34/581

METAPHYSICAL DOGMAS. 1 3

against its encroachments, so as to reduce it at length to merefunctions of police, in n o way pa rticipa ting in the suprem edirection of collective action and social developm ent. Th iswas th e inevitable action by which th e social evolution wasbro ug ht ab o u t: and it is our m isfortune tha t it now rem ainsas an obstacle to the reorganization tha t we need. As theprocess could not but occupy several centuries, the power thatwrought it must needs be invested with something definitiveand absolute in the popular view, which cannot look far be-yond the present: and it was well that it was so; for the old

system could not have been deprived of its directing powers,if they had not been stripped off from the governments, andassumed by the polity which had arisen to supersede them.

Regarding the doctrine in a more special view, pOffma ofit is clear th at its mo st im po rtant princ iple is th e liberty ofright of free inqui ry , or th e dogm a of unbounded conscience.liberty of conscience; involving the immediate consequencesof the liberty of the press, or of any other mode of expression,and of com m unication of opinions. This is the rallying-po intof the revolutionary doctrine, to which all orders of mindshave come up,the proud and the humble, the wise and theweak,those whose other opinions were compatible with thisdogma, and those who unconsciously held views of an oppositeorder. Th e impulse of this emancipation was irres istib le;and the revolutionary contagion was, in this one respect, uni-versal. I t is a chief characte ristic of the m ind of society inth is centu ry. Th e most zealous partisans of the theological

polity are as apt as their adversaries to jud ge by the ir per-sonal knowledge; and those who, in their writings, set up asdefenders of spiritual government, recognize, like the revolu-tionists whom they attack, no other supreme auth ority thanth a t of their own reason. No w if we look at what is the realmeaning of this dogma of the universal and absolute right ofinquiry, we shall find th a t i t is the m ere abs tract expression(such as is common in metaphysics) of the temporary state ofunbounded liberty in which the human mind was left by thedecay of the theological philosophy, and which must last tillth e social adven t of th e positive philosophy. Such an em -bodiment of the fact of the absence of intellectual regulationpowerfully concurred in expediting the dissolution of the oldsystem . Th e formula could not bu t appear absolute at thetime, because no one could foresee the scope of the transi-tion al state which it m ar ke d; a state which is even now m is-


35/581


taken by many enlightened m inds for a definitive one. N eg a-tive as we now see this dogma to be, signifying release from oldau tho rity while wa iting for the necessity of positive science, (anecessity which already puts liberty of conscience out of thequestion in astronomy and physics, etc.,) the absolute charac tersupposed to reside in it gave it energy to fulfil its revolu tion-ary des tination; enabled philosophers to explore the principlesof a new organization ; and, by ad m itting the right of all to asimilar research, encouraged the discussion which must pre-cede and effect the trium ph of those principles. W hene ve rthose principles shall have become established, the right offree inquiry will abide within its natu ral and pe rm anent lim its :th at is, men will discuss, under appropriate intellectual con-ditions, the real connection of various consequences with fun-dam ental rules uniformly respected. Till then, the opinionswhich will hereafter bring understandings into submission toan exact continuous discipline by embodying the principlesof the new social order can appear only as simple individualthou gh ts, produced in virtue of the righ t of free in qu iry ; since

their final supremacy can result in no other way than fromthe voluntary assent of numbers, after the freest discussion.I shall enter further into this subject he rea fter: and what Ihave said will, I hope, prevent any one being shocked by mygeneral appreciation of the revolutionary dogma of free in-quiry, as it is plain that without it this book would never havebeen written.

Indispensable and salutary as it has been, thi s dogm a cannever be an organic principle: and, moreover, it constitutesan obstacle to reorganization, now that its activity is no longerabsorbed by the demolition of the old political orde r. I n anycase, private or public, the state of inquiry can evidently beonly provisional, indicating the condition of mind which pre-cedes and prepares for a final decision, towards which our rea-son is always tending, even when it is renouncing old princi-ples, in order to form new ones. I t is takin g the exceptionfor the rule when we set up, as a natural and permanent state,the precarious situation which belongs to the period of transi-tion ; and we ignore the deepest necessities of human reasonwhen we would pro tract th at scepticism which is produced bythe passage from one mode of belief to another, and which is,in our need of fixed points of conviction, a kind of morbidperturbation which cannot be prolonged beyond the corre-sponding crisis withou t serious danger. To be always exa-


36/581

DOGMA OF LIBE RT Y OF CON SCIENCE. 1 5

mining and never deciding would be regarded as somethinglike m adness in private co nd uc t: and no dogm atic consecra-tion of such conduct in all individuals could constitute anyperfection of social order, with regard to ideas which it ismuch more essential, and much more difficult to establishbeyo nd the reach of dispute. Th ere are very few persons whoconsider themselves fit to sit in judgment on the astronomical,physical, and chemical ideas which are destined to enter intosocial circ ula tion; and everybody is willing t ha t tho se ideasshould d irect corresponding op eration s; and here we see the

beg innin gs of intellectual gov ernm ent. Can it be supposedthat the most important and the most delicate conceptions,and those which by their complexity are accessible to only asmall num ber of highly-prepared unde rstandings, are to be aban -doned to the arbitrary and variable decisions of the least com-petent minds ? If such an anom aly could be imag ined per-manent, a dissolution of the social state must ensue, throughthe ever-growing divergence of individual understandings, de-livered over to the ir disorderly na tur al impulses in the mostvague and easily perv erted of all orders of ideas. The specu-lative inertia common to most minds, and perhaps, to a cer-tain ex ten t, th e wise reserve of popu lar good sense, tend , nodoubt, to restrict such political aberrations but these are in-fluences too feeble to root out the pretens ion of every m an toset him self up as a sovereign arbiter of social the orie s; a pre-tension which every intelligent man blames in others, witha reservation, more or less explicit, of his own personal com-

petency . Now the intellectual reorganization cannot proceedamidst such a state of things, because the convergence ofminds requires the renunciation by the greater number ofth ei r rig ht of individual inquiry on subjects above the ir qua-lifications, and requiring, more than any others, a real andperm ane nt agreement. Then again, the unbridled am bitionof ill-prepared intellects rush es in am ong the most complexand obscure questions: and these disturbances, though theym us t finally n eutralize each othe r, mak e terrible devastationin the in ter va l; and each one th at is destroyed m akes way foran o th er ; so th at the issue of these controversies is a perpetualaggravation of the intellectual anarchy.

No association whatever, even of the smallest number ofindiv idua ls, and for th e m ost tem porary objects, can subsistwithout a certain degree of reciprocal confidence, intellectual


37/581


and moral, among its members, each one of whom has inces-santly to act upon views which he must admit on the faith ofsome one else. If it is so in this limited case, there is som e-thing monstrous in proposing the opposite procedure in thecase of the whole human race, each one of whom is at anextreme distance from the collective point of view, and is thelast person of the whole number fit to judge of the rules bywhich his personal action should be directed. Be th e in tel -lectual development of each and all what it may, social ordermust ever be incompatible with a perpetual discussion of thefoundations of society. System atic toleration can exist onlywith regard to opinions which are considered indifferent ordoubtful, as we see in th at aspect of the revo lutionary spiritwhich takes its stand on Protestantism, where the innumer-able Christian sects are too weak to pretend to spiritual do-minion, but where there is as fierce an intolerance abou t anycommon point of doctrine or discipline as in the RomishChurch itself. An d when the critical doctrine was, at thebeginning of the French Revolution, supposed to be organic,

we know how the directors of the movement strove to ob taina general assent, voluntary or forced, to the dogmas of therevolutionary philosophy, which they regarded as the bases ofsocial order, and therefore above controversy . W e shall seehereafter what are the due limits of the right of free inquiry,in a general way, and in regard to our own social period. I tis enough to observe here that political good sense hasadopted, to express the first requisite of all organization, thatfine axiom of the Catholic C hu rch; in necessary things unity:

in doubtful things liberty: in all things charity :a maximwhich admirably proposes the problem, without, however,suggesting the principles by which it m ust be solved, and th atun ity attained which would be a mere illusion if i t did no t re -sult, in the first instance, from free discussion.

The dogma which ranks next in importancef to tha t of free inquiry is that of E qu al ity ; and

in the same way, it is taken to be absolute whenit is only relative, and permanent, while it expresses merelythe position of minds employed in breaking up the old system.It is an immediate consequence of liberty of conscience, whichbrings after it the most fundamental equality of all, th at ofintelligence. The supposition of its being absolute was no tless necessary in th is case than th e form er: for, if all social


38/581

DOGMA OF EQUAL ITY. 1 7

classification had no t been system atically disallowed, the oldcorporations would have preserved their sway, from the im-possibility of thei r conceiving of any other classification. Tothis day we have no sufficiently distinct notion ourselves ofsuch an arrangement as would be tru ly appropriate to a newstate of civilization. W hen the dogma of equality hadachieved the overthrow of the old polities, it could not butbecome an obstacle to any reorganization, because its activitymust then be directed against the bases of any new classifica-tion whatever; for, of course, any classification must be in-compatible with the equality that was claimed for all. Sincethe abolition of slavery, the re has been no denial, from anyquarter, of the right of every man (innocent of strong anti-social conduct) to expect from all others the fulfilment of theconditions necessary to the natural development of his per-sonal activity, suitably directed: but beyond that undisputedright, men cannot be made, because they are not, equal, noreven equ ivalent; and they cannot therefore possess, in a stateof association, any identical rights beyond the great originalone. The simple physical inequalities which fix the atten -tion of superficial observers are much less marked than in-tellec tual and moral differences; and the progress of civi-lization tends to increase these more im portant differences,as much as to lessen the inferior k in d : and, applied to anyassemblage of persons thus developed, the dogma of equalitybecomes anarchical, and directly hostile to its original desti-nation.

The second result of the dogma of liberty of p o g m a of ^econscience is the Sovereignty of th e peo ple: and, Sovereignty oflike the former, it wrought at first the double t h e People.service of destroying the old regime and preparing for a newone. Till the final system could be constituted, the onlysafeguard against the renewed supremacy of the old one wasin the setting up of provisional institutions, which the peoplesclaimed the absolute right to change at will. I t was only bymeans of the doctrine of popular sovereignty that that succes-sion of political endeavours could take place which must pre-

cede the installation of a true system of government, wheneverthe intellectual renovation of society shall be sufficiently ad-vanced to settle the conditions and natural extent of thedifferent sovereignties. Meanw hile, in discharging its func-tion, this dogma proves its revolutionary character before our


39/581


eyes, b y opposing a ll reorganization, condemning, as i t does,all t h e superior to an arbitrary dependence on t h e mu l t i t udeof t h e inferior, by a k ind of t ransference t o t he peoples o f th edivine right which h a d become t h e opprobr ium of k ings .Dogma of Na- T h e revolutionary spirit of the critical doc -tional Inde- tr in e man ifes ts itsel f no less clearly w he n we lookpendence. ^ internation al relat ions. T h e necessity of orderbeing in this case more equivocal and obscure, t h e absence ofall regulating power h a s been more ingenuou sly declared th anin other cases. W h en t h e ancient spiritual power w as po li t i-

cally annulled, t h e dissolution of European order followedspontaneously from t h e principle of l iberty of conscience;and t h e mo st na tur al papal function was a t an end . Till t h enew social organization shall show us the law by which t h enations shall become once more connected, t h e metaphysicalnot ions of national isolation, an d therefore of mutu a l no n- in-tervention, must prevail ; and they will b e regarded as abso-lute till i t appears how th ey defeat the ir ow n end . A s a l la t tempts a t Eur opea n co-ordination m ust otherwise be d i -

rected by t he ancient system, we owe to the doctrine o f n a -t ional independence o u r rescue from t h e monstrous arrange-m e n t of the mo st civilized na tio ns bei ng po litically su bo rd i-nated t o the least ad vanced, because t h e latt er w ere leastchanged from their ancient state, a n d would b e sure thereforeto be placed a t the head of such a n association. B u t , if sucha doctrine were more than provisional, t h e natio ns would sinkbelow their state i n the Middle Ages ; and a t the very t im ewhen they a re marked ou t , by an ever-growing resemblance,

for a n association more extensive, and , a t the same t ime moreregular, than that which w as proposed by the o ld catholic a n dfeudal system. I t is clear th at wh en t h e dogma of na t iona lisolation h a s fulfilled i ts function of separating t h e nat ions , i norder t o a preparation for a new union, i t s further act ion m us tbe as purely anarchical as t ha t of its predecessors.

A brief notice of the logical inconsistency of th e revolu-tionary doctrine will conclude o u r prel im inary review of i t .Inconsistency T h i s inconsistency is more radical an d moreof the Meta- manif est th an i n the case of the re t rograde o rphysical doc- theological doctrine; bu t i t does n o t imply sot rme# u t ter a condemnat ion ; n o t only o n account ofi ts recent formation, b u t because such a vice does n o t preventits fulfilling i t s critical office. N ot w ith st an di ng profo und dif-


40/581

INCONSISTENCY OF THE DOCTRINE. 1 9

ferences, the adversaries of the old polity found no difficultyin uniting for successive partial demolitions about which theywere agreed, postponing till their period of success their con-tests about the ulterior developments of their doctrine; acourse which would be impossible in the case of any organicoperation, in which each part must be considered in its rela-tion to the whole. Thus far only, however, can the inconsis-tency be tolerated. W he n once the whole of any doctrinebecomes hostile to its original purposes, it is condemned: andthis is tru e of the metaphysical doctrine, which at once op -poses the progress it professed to aid, and sustains the foun-dations of the political system it proposed to destroy.

Its culminating point was at the most marked period of thefirst French Revolution, when it was, by an unavoidable illu-sion, taken to be the principle of social reorganization. I twas then seen in its best aspect of consistency and power; andthen it was that, the ancient system being disposed of, itsvices became app aren t. I t showed itself hostile to all socialreorganization, and became actually retrograde in its charac-ter by setting itself up in violent opposition to the movementof modern civilization. Fo r one illustration, look at thestrange metaphysical no tion of a supposed sta te Notion of aof n atu re , which was to be the prim itive and in- state of Na-variable type of every social sta te. This doc- ture#

trine is not to be attributed to Rousseau alone. I t is thatof all philosophers, in all times and countries, who have un-consciously concurred in developing the revolutionary meta-physical doctrine which Rousseau, by his urgent dialectics, onlypushed to its real conclusions. His"doc trine, which representsa state of civilization as an ever-growing degeneracy from theprimitive ideal type, is common to all modern metaphysicians;and we shall see hereafter that it is only the metaphysicalform of the theological dogma of the degradation of the hu-man race by original sin. According to such a principle, allpolitical reformation must be regarded as destined to re-esta-blish that primitive state: and what is that but organizing auniversal retrogradation, though with progressive intentions ?The applications of this doctrine have been in conformity toits philosophical constitution. W hen it was necessary to re-place the feudal and catholic regime men did not fix theircontemplation on the social future, but summoned up theirimperfect remembrances of a very distant past, trying to sub-


41/581


stitu te for a decrepit system a m ore ancient and decrepit sy-stem still, bu t, for tha t very reason, neare r t o the primitivetyp e. Instead of a worn-out Catholicism, they proposed asort of metaphysical polytheism, a t the same tim e tha t, inpolity, they desired to replace the Middle Age system by theradically inferior regime of the Greeks and Rom ans. Thevery elements of modern civilization, the only possible germsof a new social state, were endangered by barbaric condem-nation of the indus trial and artistic advancement of modernsociety, in the name of p rimitive virtue and simplicity. Ev enthe scientific spirit, which is the only principle of intellectualorganization, was stigmatized as tending to in stitu te an aris-tocracy of knowledge which was as incompatible as any otheraristocracy with the original equality tha t was to be set upagain. Lavoisier was the ma rtyr of this state of op inio n;and it is his case that will illustrate the period to our remotestposterity. I t is useless for the metaphysical school to rep re-sent such results as portentous or eccentric inciden ts. Th eirlegitimate descent from the revolutionary polity is evident and

certain; and we should witness a repetition of them if it werepossible (which it is not) for this polity to become prevalentagain. The tendency to social retrogradation , under th e ideaof returning to the primitive state, so thoroughly belongs tothe metaphysical polity, that the new sects who, in their briefday, have most haughtily censured the revolutionary imitationof Greek and Roman types, have unconsciously reproducedthe same error in a far more marked way by striving to re -establish the confusion between the temporal and spiritual

power, and extolling, as the highest social perfection, a re tu rnto the Egyptian or Hebrew theocracy, founded on fetichism,disguised under the name of pantheism.

As the metaphysical doctrine was the issue oft0 t h e theological, and destined to modify it, it was

a matter of course that it should vindicate thegeneral foundations of the old system, even after having de-stroyed its chief conditions of existence. Every reformer, forthree centuries past, while urging the development of the cri-tical spirit further than his predecessors, assumed to set im-mutable bounds to i t ; deriving his limitations from the oldsystem . All the absolute rights proclaimed as th e basis of thenew doctrine were guaranteed by a sort of religious consecra-tion, in the last resort; and this was indispensable, if their


42/581

IN ALL APPLICATIONS. 2 1

efficacy was no t to be impaired by con tinual discussion. I twas always with an invocation of the principles of the oldpolity on their lips that the reformers proceeded to demolishthe spiritual and temporal institutions in which they were em-bodied ; and the whole regime fell throu gh the conflict of itschief e lements. Hence there arose, in the intellectual region,a Christianity more and more attenuated or simplified, and re-duced at last to that vague and impotent theism which, by amonstrous conjunction of terms, metaphysicians have entitledNatural Religion as if all religion were not necessarily super-na tural. The pretension to direct a social reorganization bythis strange conception is merely a recurrence to the old prin-ciple that social order must rest on a theological basis. Thisis now the most fatal inconsistency of the revolutionary schoo l;and while armed with such a concession, the advocates of Ca-tholicism will always have an incontestable logical superiorityover the irrational defamers of the old faith, who proclaimthe need of a religious organization , and yet disallow all thenecessary conditions. I t is clear th at society would be con-demned to a perpetuity of the intellectual anarchy which cha-racterizes it at present if it were to be for ever made up ofminds which admit the want of a theological regime on theone hand, while, on the other, they reject its principal condi-tions of existence; and those who thus acknowledge them-selves incapab le have no righ t to discredit the only rationa lway to reorganization which remains open, and by which everyother order of human conceptions has been happily retrievedand established. The social application of the positive philo-sophy remains as the resource, and the only resource, after thefailure of both the preceding systems.

In its tem poral application the inconsistency ofthe metaphysical doctrine is as conspicuous as Recu iT ence to

in the spiritual. I t strives to preserve, if not thefeudal, at least the m ilitary spirit, in which the feudal had itsorigin. The French nation did, it is true , in their revolution-ary enthusiasm, proscribe war from tha t tim e forward: bu twhen the armed coalition of the retrograde forces of Europe

brou gh t out an immense am ount of energy for self-defence,for the sake of the progressive movement, the sentiment,which was grounded on no principle, soon disappeared, andFrance was distinguished by the most conspicuous militaryactivity, invested with its most oppressive characteristics. The


43/581

22 POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY.

military spirit is in fact so congen ial with the critical doctrinethat any pretex t will serve for its indulgence: as for instance,when it is proposed to regulate by war the action of the moreadvanced nations upon the less advanced. Th e tru e logicalconsequence of this would be a universal up ro ar ; but, happily,the nature of modern civilization saves us from the danger.The tendency of the critical regime in this respect is shownby the perpetual endeavours of the various sections of therevolutionary school to reinstate the memory of the man who,of all others, strove for political retrogradation, by wastingan enormous amount of power in the restoration of the m ili-tary and theological system.Principle of Before qu itting the subject of the inconsisten-Political Cen- cies of this school, I must , in justice, point outtralization. o n e m o r e con tradiction which, as being of a pro-gressive character, is honourable to those most advanced mindswhich entertain it, and which alone und erstand its necessity,opposed as i t is to the dogmas of independence and isolationwhich constitute the spirif of the critical school. I refer to

th e principle of political centralization. Th e two par ties seemhere to have changed sides. The retrograde doctrine, no tw ith-standing its proud pretensions to order and unity, preachesthe distribution of political centres, in the secret hope of pre-serving the old system yet a while longer among the mostbackward of the popu lations, by keeping th em aloof from thegeneral centres of civilization; while the revolutionary policy,on the other hand, proud of having withstood, in France, thecoalition of the old powers, discards its own maxims to recom-

mend the subordination of the secondary to the principalcentres by which such a noble stand has already been made,and which must become a most valuable auxiliary of reorgani-zation. Th us alone can the reorganization be, in the firstplace, restricted to a choice popu lation. In brief, the revolu-tionary school alone has understood tha t the increasing an-archy of the time, intellectual and m oral, requires, to preventa complete dislocation of society, a growing concentration ofpolitical action, properly so called.

Thus, after three centuries, employed in the necessary de-molition of the ancient regime the critical doc trine showsitself as incapable of other application, and as inconsistent aswe have now seen it to be. It is no more fit to secure Pro-gress, than the old doctrine to m aintain Order. But, feeble


44/581

SOCIAL OSCILLATIONS. 23

as they are apart, they actually sustain each other by theirvery antagon ism. I t is universally understood that neithercan ever again achieve a perm anent trium ph but, so strongis the apprehension of even the temporary preponderance ofeither, th at the general m ind, for want of a more rationalpoint of support, employs each doctrine in turn to restrain theencroachm ents of th e other. This miserable oscillation of oursocial life must proceed till a real doctrine, as truly organic asprogressive, shall reconcile for us the two aspects of the greatpolitical problem. Then, at last, the two opposite doctrineswill disappear for ever in the new conception that will be seento be completely adapted to fulfil th e destination of both. Oftenhas each party, blinded by some temporary success, believedthat it had annihilated the o th er ; and never has the eventfailed to mock the ignorant exultation. The critical doctrineseemed to have hum bled for ever the catholic-feudal school;bu t tha t school arose again. Napoleon thou ght he had accom-plished a retrograde rea ctio n; bu t the very energy of hisefforts caused a reaction in favour of revolutionary principles.And thus society continues to vibrate between conflicting in-fluences ; and those influences continue to exist only by thei rm utu al neu tralization. Fo r that purpose only, indeed, arethey now ever applied. N eithe r could be spared before theadvent of the state which is to succeed them . W ithout theone, we should lose the sentiment of O rder, and without theother, that of Progress and the keeping alive this sentiment,on either hand, is the only practica l efficacy which now remainsto the m . Feeble as the conception must be, in the absenceof any principle which un ites the two requisites, it is preservedby the presence of the two decaying systems; and they keepbefore the minds of both philosophers and the public the trueconditions of social reorganization, which otherwise our feeblena tu re m ight misconceive or lose sight of. Having the twotypes before us, we see the solution of the grea t problem tobe, to form a doctrine which shall be more organic than thetheological, and more progressive than the metaphysical.

The old political system can be no pattern for a regime suit-

able to a widely different civiliza tion; bu t we are not underthe less obligation to study it, in order to learn what are theessential attributes of all social organization, which must re-appear in an improved state in the future. The general con-ception of the theological and military system even seems to


45/581


me to have passed too m uch out of sight. And, as to th eCritical system, there can be no question of its affording, byits progressive character, and its exposure of the precedingregime a most valuable stim ulus to society to seek for some-thing better than mere modifications of systems that havefailed. The comm on complaint that it rende rs all governm entimpossible, is a mere avowal of impo tence on th e pa rt of thosewho ut te r it. W hatever are its imperfections, it fulfilled fora time one of the two re qu isites: its abolition would in noway assist the re-establishm ent of O rd er ; and no declamationsagainst the revolutionary philosophy will affect the instinctiveattachment of society to principles which have directed itspolitical progress for three centuries past, and which arebelieved to represent the indispensable conditions of itsfuture development. Each of its dogmas affords an indicationof how the improvem ent is to be effected. Ea ch expresses th epolitical aspect of certain high moral obligations which th eretrog rade school, with all its pretensions, was compelled toignore, because its system had lost all power to fulfil them .

In this way, the dogma of Free Inq uiry decides that thespiritual reorganization must result from purely intellectualaction, providing for a final voluntary and unanim ous assen t,without the disturbing intervention of any heterogeneous pow er.Again, the dogmas of Equ ality and the Sovereignty of the peo-ple devolve on the new powers and classes of society th e du ty ofa public-spirited social conduct, instead of working the manyfor the interests of the few. The old system practised thesemoralities in its best days; but they are now maintained only

by the revolutionary doctrine, which it would be fatal to partwith till we have some substitute in these particular respects;for th e effect would be tha t we should be delivered over to th edark despotism of the old system;to the restorers of reli-gions, for instance, who, if proselytism failed, would haverecourse to tyranny to compel unity, if once the principle offree inquiry were lost from among us.

It is useless to declaim against the critical philosophy, andto deplore, in the name of social order, the dissolving energyof the spirit of analysis and inqu iry. I t is only by thei r usetha t we can obtain materials for reorg aniz ation; m aterialswhich shall have been thorough ly tested by free discussion,carried on till general conviction is secured. Th e philosophywhich will arise out of thi s satisfaction of the pub lic reason


46/581

STAGE OF INDECISION 2 5

will the n assign th e rational limits which must obviate theabuse of the analytical spirit, by establishing that distinctionin social m atters , between the field of reasoning and tha t ofpure observation, which we have found already marked out inregard to every other kind of science.

Though consigned, by the course of events, to a negativedoctrine for awhile, society has never renounced the laws ofhuman reason: and when the proper time arrives, society willuse the rights of this reason to organize itself anew, on prin-ciples which will then have been ascertained and estimated.The existing state of no-government seems necessary at pre-sent, in order to that ascertainment of principles; but it doesnot at all follow, as some eccentric individuals seem to think,that the right of inquiry imposes the duty of never deciding.The prolonged indecision proves merely that the principleswhich are to close the deliberation are not yet sufficiently esta-blished. I n the same way, because society claims the righ t ofchoosing and varying its institutions and governing powers, itby no means follows that the right is for ever to be used inchoosing and varying, when its indefinite use shall have becomeinjurious. W hen the right conditions shall have been ascer-tained, society will submit its choice to the rules which willsecure its efficacy; and in the interva l, noth ing can be morefavourable to future order than that the political course shouldbe kept open, to adm it of the free rise of the new social system.As it happens, the peoples have, thus far, erred on the side oftoo hasty a desire for reorganization, and a too generous con-fidence in every promise of social order, instead of havingshown the systematic distrust attributed to the revolutionarydoctrine by those whose worn-out claims will not bear dis-cussion. There is more promise of political reorganization inthe revolutionary doctrine than in the retrograde, though it isthe supreme claim of the latter to be the safeguard of socialOrder.

Such is the vicious circle in which we are atpresen t confined. W e have seen what is theantagonism of two doc

Auguste Comte - The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte II

Documents

Transcript of Auguste Comte - The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte II