130 ANALYSIS AND CRITICISM 



an interesting comparison with William James, the great advocate 

 of plm-ahsm. George Sidney Brett stresses their similarities: 



'An instructive parallel might be drawn between Taine and 

 James, not only in respect of their qualities as writers and the 

 character of their interest in human life, but also as the two pro- 

 minent exponents of anti-rationalistic methods. It is true that 

 Taine was not fully emancipated; but it is also true that James 

 was enslaved by excess of liberty.' ^6 



Thus, in James' Psychology, the chapter on 'Reasoning' (XXII) 

 goes along with Taine in mentioning 'analysis' and 'abstraction' ^7; 

 but then James dissents on the monistic issue: 'AU ways of con- 

 ceiving a concrete fact, if they are true ways at all, are equally 

 true ways. There is no property ABSOLUTELY essential to any one 

 thing '^^ 



On this issue, James' position might be characterized as 

 'anarchic' — though 'democratic' is a term which better conveys 

 his intention and spirit — whereas Taine's, based on a hierarchy 

 of forces in nature, might be characterized as 'monarchic' and 

 'oligarchic'. Thus, at the top oi 3. pyramid (which can be taken as a 

 symbol for any system of relations) the Master Faculty 'rules'; 

 below it is the oligarchy of Race-Environment-Time, comprising 

 the whole of the possible causes of 'motion'; below these is the 

 broad base of many lesser causes, a multiplicity of factors such as 

 have been sketched in previous chapters (especially VII and 

 VIII). 29 Another image might be that of many rivulets and 

 brooks flowing into three rivers, which in turn combine to form 

 one powerful stream of tendency. The first of these metaphors, 

 however, is too static, the second is too mechanical. The truest 

 picture of Taine's intention is that of an organism, 'ruled' by a 

 nervous system (or, in the pre-scientific conception, a heart); 

 composed of a few major organs; these in turn composed of many 

 lesser tissues and cells, and so forth. Whichever image is used, the 

 central point is that our process of analysis, as it goes from the 

 particular to the general, from the concrete to the abstract, is also 

 going from the varied effects to the simple cause; and from ele- 

 ments which are less, to those which are more, fundamental and 

 important; thus establishing a 'hierarchy of necessities'. 



If we may risk a rather broad generalization, recent develop- 

 ments in the psychological and social sciences have tended to 

 combine elements of James' pluralism with Taine's hierarchical 



