classes would as soon ignore the moon in attempting a theory
of tides as ignore social control in accounting for the evolution of dogma, or metaphysics, or moral doctrines. In truth a Weltanschauung can never win to wide favor unless it "squares" the guardians of order. Therefore a synthesis that attains to great and lasting favor, like Stoicism, Neo-Platonism, the theology of Thomas Aquinas, the Leibnitzian system, the "common-sense philosophy," or German Idealism, should not be taken seriously, since it is merely an attempt to reconcile extant knowledge with the requirements of social control. When a theory of the world is promulgated, one asks, "Is it true?" ninety-nine ask, "Does it provide a firm basis for religion and morals?" "Philosophy," says Novalis finely, "cannot bake bread; but she can give us God, Freedom, Immortality." "True," answers the sociologist, "but these can bake bread."
III.
Moral education.— On all sides our educators are voicing a demand for a moral instruction of the young that shall bear fruit in more abundant righteousness. The work of the church and the home is not up to the level of today's requirements, and the need is openly acknowledged of making the school a moral engine. The partisans of ecclesiastical control have been prompt to turn to account the admission that in our schemes of intellectual instruction there is something left out. But we cannot fall back upon their church schools, which provide, it is true, a measure of control, but at what cost of mental darkness ! A way must be found to make the public schools effective for righteousness.
But if my exposé of social control is correct, such a way exists, and we need not be forced upon the horns of the dilemma either to leave the schools "godless," and therefore unmoral, or to make them moral by making them sectarian. In my studies entitled "Belief" and "Religion" I owned the moral value of belief. But elsewhere I described several non-religious types of control. The educator, in quest of a moral teaching that can
