i 9 o THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



fused by the conflicting requirements of internal amity and exter- 

 nal enmity. 



Already it has been made clear that the idea of justice, or at 

 least the idea of human justice, contains two elements. On the 

 one hand there is that positive element implied by recognition of 

 each man's claims to unimpeded activities and the benefits they 

 bring. On the other hand there is that negative element implied 

 by the consciousness of limits which the presence of other men 

 having like claims necessitates. Two opposite traits in these two 

 components especially arrest the attention. 



Inequality is the primordial idea suggested. For if the prin- 

 ciple is that each shall receive the benefits and evils due to his 

 own nature and consequent conduct, then since men differ in their 

 powers there must be differences in the results of their actions. 

 Unequal amounts of benefit are implied. 



Mutual limitations to men's actions suggest a contrary idea. 

 When it is seen that if each pursues his ends regardless of his 

 neighbor's claims, quarrels must be caused and social co-opera- 

 tion hindered, there arises the consciousness that bounds must be 

 set to the doings of each ; and the thought of spheres of action 

 bounded by one another, involves the conception of equality. 



Unbalanced appreciations of these two factors in human justice 

 lead to divergent moral and social theories, which we must now 

 glance at. 



In some of the rudest groups of men the appreciations are no 

 higher than those which we see among inferior gregarious ani- 

 mals. Here the stronger takes what he pleases from the weaker 

 without exciting general reprobation ; while, elsewhere, there is 

 practiced and tacitly approved something like communism. But 

 where habitual war has developed political organization, the idea 

 of inequality becomes predominant. If not among the conquered, 

 who are made slaves, yet among the conquerors, who naturally 

 think of that which conduces to their interest as that which 

 ought to be, there is fostered this element in the conception of 

 justice which asserts that superiority shall have the benefits of 

 superiority. 



Though the Platonic dialogues may not be taken as measures 



of Greek belief, yet we may reasonably assume that the things 



they take for granted were currently accepted. Socrates inquires 



— " Do you admit that it is just for subjects to obey their rulers ? " 



' I do," replies Thrasymachus.* Though otherwise in antagonism, 



* The Republic, Book I, translated by Jowett, p. 159 (edit, of 1871). Instead of " Do 

 you admit," the rendering given by Messrs. Llewelyn Davies and Yaughan is " You doubt- 



less also maintain." 



