1915] ^- J- Meltser 285 



and fulfill their simple dtities, not more and not less. But when 

 their country is at war, a new spirit comes over them ; they become 

 altruists, they are ready to bring sacrifices, to lose their lives or to 

 become cripples for life. Whether a country is right or wrong with 

 regard to the merits of a particular war in the eyes of an outsider, 

 a neutral, this has no bearing upon the moral Status of the man 

 in his own country. That Status is unquestionably elevated during 

 war, and even after the war his relations to his countrymen remain 

 on a higher moral plane. 



Now let me recapitulate briefly. Human morality, whatever the 

 nature of its origin may be, was and is subject to evolutionary influ- 

 ences. It began in the pre-savage State of men. Its development 

 has been and is a very slow process. In its present State we must 

 sharply distinguish between intranational and international ethics; 

 there is an abyss between them. Intranational morals attained a 

 high State. Intellectual activities of all kinds were and are most 

 important factors in its growth. The morality in international re- 

 lations, on the other band, is generally low, and is frightfully bad 

 when these relations are interrupted by war. War is an animal 

 method of settling differences between two contending vicious spe- 

 cies, and human intellectual activities greatly intensify the deadliness 

 of the procedure. The efforts to create international laws for the 

 purposeof restraining the ferocityof international struggles proved 

 of little avail. We have cultured, civilized Germans, Frenchmen, 

 Englishmen, and so on, hiit the world is not yet inhabited by cultured 

 civilized men. 



Apparently biological processes are operative in these horrible 

 differences between the intranational and international states of 

 morality. Intellectual activity is capable of efficiently assisting in 

 the development of morality among individuals which are allied by 

 some organic and social bonds ; thus little or no resistance is offered 

 to the beneficent intellectual influence. But individuals of different 

 strains, with natural divergences and antagonisms, sustained by 

 differences in education, customs, forms of law, etc., offer great 

 resistance to the unifying influences of intellectual activity. 



Accordingly, biological traits common to all animals, while some 

 of them may exert a favorable influence upon the evolution, rate of 



