all are champions of democratic ideas; in all we find a profound belief in the people, an assertion of the worth of the individual, a rejection of the sway of the superman. It may be these views are partly the effect of an undertow of popular feeling. We may hope they are at the same time prophetic of the future and will have a guiding influence on the trend of the national life.

Perhaps the thought uppermost in the mind of Ward, a thought which he held to the day he died, as evidenced in late addresses, was of the tremendous possibilities for social good which repose in the latent capacities of the masses. The social organization was to be perfected, and collective happiness attained, by putting the latent to use. Knowledge was the means. It is the right of each and every individual to share fully in the knowledge and culture which the race has accumulated up to the present moment. Each is by nature joint heir to the social estate. It is the opinion of agronomists, says Hayes, that the yield of American corn lands could be doubled by the application of the lessons of science, and likewise, he asserts, the harvest of life for the people of America. could be doubled if the possibilities with which they are endowed by nature were brought to approximate realization. One of Todd's striking passages upholds the latent fineness of the individual, notwithstanding an ugly exterior, and suggests too the means of turning him to the higher life. After a comment on the work of Burbank in changing the character of plants, he asks, "Where is the wizard who will turn thorny, unproductive, selfish, shirking, cross-grained human natures into co-operators, good citizens, and members of a great, united human brotherhood? He is perhaps even now in our midst. But, whoever he is, it is safe to say that his means will be social education, centering about a new concept of the self. And his philosophy will be a constructive optimism that includes a liberal view of human nature, precisely because human nature and the self are trustworthy when given proper surroundings. 'Human nature is all right as it is,' declares a modern preacher. 'Human nature needs no change and nobody

is trying to change it. It only needs a chance.' "8 without social vision sees only what his eyes reveal. with it sees the latencies in the human situation.

The man

The mau

A belief in the masses and the ascription of worth to every individual is, of course, wholly consistent with the recognition of natural leadership. By means of educating all, Ward hoped to increase social leadership; he said that by a system of universal education especially talented leaders, 'the dynamic agents of society," could be increased one hundred fold. Ellwood makes the statement that "Nothing great is achieved in human society without personal leadership. . . . From the simplest stone implement to the automobile, most men have had to use or copy the invention of the exceptional mind." In fact, it is when the latencies of the masses are recognized that the question of leadership becomes all the more important. The selection and training of leaders today is especially the task of the higher institutions of learning. It is of the utmost practical importance that they perform their tasks well, because "with expert leadership the capacity of civilized people for social progress might be increased almost indefinitely." But the leadership urged by Ward and Ellwood is the kind that issues in service. There is no safe leadership unless the people are intelligent enough to select leaders who aim to serve. Todd issues a warning against the egotistical dominance of some "natural" leaders. "Is it not time to cease paying with no questions asked the price demanded by Caesar or John, Warwick or Richard the Third, Napoleon or Bismarck? Utilize the élite; cultivate genius, if that be possible; endow it, if necessary to protect it from want (great inventive genius has scarcely ever been appropriately cared for); reward it according to real contribution; but make it an aristocracy like that of Aristides, who, in a memorable debate, challenged his opponent in these terms: 'It is for us to struggle, both now and ever, which of us shall perform the greatest services to his country.' It is evident that the school should supply for the youth it

3 Theories of Social Progress, p. 8.

4 Ellwood: Intro. to Social Psy., p. 158.

5 Theories of Social Progress, p. 542.

teaches standards for the judging of great men. It should help him to estimate the paramount influence of this and that hero. The worth of each should be ascertained by searching examination. The contribution each has made to human welfare is the test. If this had been done there might not have been such a large cult of Napoleon worshippers in the late nineteenth century. The school too must strive to develop leaders. But in some quarters today leadership is over-emphasized, to the neglect of the education of the masses. If we required every boy and girl

in the country to complete an education in a well organized high school the problem of leadership would take care of itself. What we need most of all is a heightened general intelligence for the selection and stimulation of leaders.

All the writers studied present a dynamic view of society. Humanity is in movement. Ward's great work is Dynamic Sociology. He said sociology had to do with human achievement Todd's central problem is that of social progress, movement in the direction of human well being. Cooley's last book is named Social Process, and the opening sentence reads, "We see around us in the world of men an onward movement of life." The same is true of Ross. Of the fifty-seven chapters in his Principles of Sociology, thirty-eight treat of social processes. Society is dynamic; nevertheless, at every stage we find a relative fixity. Society is held together by various forms of organization, institutions, customs, modes of thought. At any given stage these forms determine the character of the individual. We found the child's life to be a reflection of the organized mind of his group. Society itself, as Ellwood insists, is fundamentally organized mind. The mental attitudes of one group are affected by the attitudes which exist or are supposed to exist in other groups. In spite of the "vision splendid" of idealistic youth, he most likely becomes a self-seeking shirk when ushered into a form of organization characterized by egotism and exploitation. Fortunately, the social mind is always capable of reorganization. The dynamic conception is optimistic. A dynamic society is ever shuffling off old for new forms of organization. In so far as the movement is pro

gressive, it means deeper understanding among the individuals and groups making up the whole, greater reciprocal good will, and increased common devotion to the general welfare.

Education as the means to progress has been emphasized in all the preceding articles. With Ward it is the general diffusion of scientific knowledge. This is the only path to a higher organization of society and to effect it we need a deep and universal faith in popular education. Centuries ago men built great cathedrals, expressions of their collective faith and aspiration. Men aspire no less today, but their aims have a new direction. Today our hopes center in better social organization, and in education as the means of attaining it. Todd approaches the problem of progress from many avenues, and in each of them finds the answer in social education. The problem of society to Hayes is to unite social control and enlightenment, and enlightened control necessarily rests upon educated personalities. Ellwood sees the need of a deep popular faith in education as the savior and regenerator of democracy. And it must be a practical faith, leading to adequate financial support of schools. He emphasizes especially education for unselfish leadership, moral training in the public schools, and much more attention in the curriculum to the social studies.

When we urge education as the social panacea, however, we must acknowledge limitations in the material at hand. What ought to be taught is often not clear. Ward lamented the absence of social knowledge. And there is today a lack of settled principles and standards of conduct, an uncertainty of what is consistent with the higher social organization. Old forms are passing away before new ones are substituted. "The higher morality," says Cooley, "if it is to be attained at all, must be especially thought out." It has by no means been thought out in application to the many specific human situations in which a person finds himself a part. "We find, then, that people have to make up their own minds upon their duties as wives, husbands, mothers, and daughters; upon commercial obligations and citizenship. Inevitably many of us make a poor business of it. It is too

much."6

We need to teach young people the best ethical standards known to us to meet these specific situations. But we need also the assistance of a group of social seers to shape and clarify the standards themselves. These standards constitute the social organization. Nowhere is the work of the leader so vitally required.

The social seer will, of course, be an expert in the science of society. Ethics has become essentially a social study. All standards of conduct pertain to social situations. Sociology and ethics closely blend with sociology, the larger term. The most recent statement on the relation of sociology and ethics is by Hayes.7 According to him these sciences coincide both in their practical and theoretical aspects. It should be noted, however, that he discounts a priori speculation, which has been the historical method of ethics. Ethics is a study of objective realities, its field being the facts of social life. But while sociology seeks causes and explanations of social realities in all divisions of social life, ethics is concerned with these only in so far as they issue in good or evil. It has to do with "the terminus ad quem of the life men live in society." In fact, all of the sociologies studied are contributions to the science of ethics. This means that certain types of human relationship and forms of social organization are urged as superior. These writings show evidence of enthusiastic human interest, and a vision of a social order as yet far from realization. Problems of right and wrong are suggested by the contrast between that which is and that which ought to be. It is obvious to the reader that the writers are men intensely interested in the trend of the social process, let us say, in the outcome of the social conflict. Their writings indicate a liberal view of human nature. In human nature and society are latencies that have never been elicited. These latencies afford the possibilitis of new and superior forms of social organization. If present forms do not accord with the expression of human nature thus liberally conceived, progress requires the substitution of new forms of organization.

6 Social Organization, p. 352.

7 Sociology and Ethics, 1921