NOTES AND ABSTRA CTS ^ I 5
in an organ. But as societies develop, becoming larger and more complicated, the individual attains gradual freedom and gains in autonomy. In short, is it not the regime of castes toward which organisms seem to tend, and at the same time the point from which societies seem to depart ? Comparing, in this manner, organic forms with social forms, may we not conclude that social evolution is exactly the reverse of organic evolution ? Taking the organic point of view, the better organization would be the regime of castes, and the most perfect society would be that where there would be less liberty and equality."
But the advocates of the organic theory have never asserted that the regime of castes constituted the distinctive mark of social perfection. They have always affirmed that a being is the more perfect according to the degree in which its functions are the more differentiated. In making this statement the organicistes emphasize the function and not the individual. It is here that M. Bougie" falls into his error. He considers only the individual and confounds division into castes with differentiation of functions.
Division into castes is diametrically opposed to a differentiation of functions. In a society without castes the functions would be performed by individuals adapted to fulfill them. In a society of castes this would not be the case.
M. Bougie" does not perceive that liberty in the last analysis is nothing other than the differentiation of functions. All the liberties, for example, relating to governments have their basis in a complete differentiation of functions between the regulating organs and the economic and intellectual organs. This is what we see produced on such a vast scale in biological organisms. Perfect differentiation consists in the abso- lute impossibility of one organ performing the function of another.
Liberty also signifies the guaranty of the rights of the individual. If governments should execute their functions properly, liberty would be complete, since the rights of all would be scrupulously respected by the political authorities.
Passing from liberty to equality, M. Bougie" confuses political equality with social equality. Political equality is nothing more than liberty considered from a dif- ferent point of view. In a well-organized society, equality ought to be complete ; but this means political equality. On the contrary, it is easy to demonstrate that, as a society tends toward perfection, the greater will be the social inequality. Among savages an Edison would have only a few more comforts than his neighbors, but in a highly civilized society an Edison making only a little improvement in electric lamps could realize millions. The same is true of moral inequality.
The organicistes affirm that the general laws of biology are applicable to soci- ology, but it does not follow that they confound physiological phenomena with social phenomena. In sociology there is not heredity, but rather successivitt.
M. Bougie" identifies the term "organism " with a particular form. The organicistes have never asserted that there is a similarity of structure between social organisms and plants or animals. They have asserted that there are biological similitudes, which is an entirely different thing. In nature living forms are infinite. An organism may be defined as an ensemble of living parts among which an interdependence of functions is established.
M. Bougie" also mentions the fact that in certain animal organisms extent of move- ment of the cells is limited, while the movement in societies is much more extensive. But it is to be noted that the characteristic of organisms is interdependence of func- tions, and where this exists, though limitation of movements does not exist, we still have organisms.
In the same way M. Bougie" is deceived in taking adherence as a characteristic of the organism. Adherence is an accidental fact ; neither proximity nor even adherence of parts is the essential characteristic of an organism. But functional interdepend- ence being the essential characteristic of the organism, whether it operates at large or small distance, by physiological or psychical processes, is of little import.
Biological organisms, being much older, are infinitely more perfect than social organisms, and offer an ideal that societies are still far from attaining. Thus an association like the body of man is a veritable marvel. The division of labor is carried to an extreme limit, the adaptation of organs to function is complete. If societies ever succeed in imitating this model, the sum of human happiness would be immediately increased tenfold. J. Novicow, " La Sociologie biologique et le regime des castes," in Revue philosophique, October, 1900. E. M.
