OF SOCIETY. 539 



solve, the social problem of the age, he probably learnt 

 in the school of Saint- Simon and by opposition to 

 some of Saint-Simon's followers, notably to Proudhon. 

 But he gained in precision by studying the works of 

 Adam Smith, and notably those of his followers, Malthus 

 and Eicardo. From Saint-Simon he took over the con- 

 ception that the moving force in modern society is 

 industrial and commercial. And the writings of Adam 

 Smith and Eicardo taught him that among the indus- 

 trial forces the leading force is, not that of the 

 capitalist but the interests of labour. If Saint-Simon's 

 social philosophy exalts the industrial middle class in 

 opposition to the nobility and clergy, Marx goes a step 

 further and urges the interests of the labouring class 

 and the proletariat, i.e., of the fourth estate as against 

 those of the third estate, the bourgeoisie. But Marx 

 does not follow altogether in the footsteps of Saint- 

 Simon or of most of his followers. He does not in- 75. 



The dualism 



troduce into his social speculations that dualism which ofsaint- 



Simon and 



is so characteristic of Saint -Simon and after him of Comte dis - 



appears. 



Comte. 



In Saint-Simon we have indeed a clear recognition of 

 the economic and industrial problems of the age; but 

 we have also the distinct enunciation of what we may 

 call the ideal factor in the history of progress and 

 civilisation. Though he opposes the spiritual hierarchy 

 and tyranny of former ages he proclaims a new Chris- 

 tianity and religion which is to control society. 



In Comte we have not only a clear enunciation of 

 the two principles which actuate human conduct, viz., 

 egoism and altruism ; but we have, especially in his 



