246 SOCIAL AND INDIVIDUAL 



any student of history knows now that to slacken the bonds 

 of the State is to pull down the sky and let loose the 

 foundations of the great deep upon its citizens. 



But, it may be asked, do we not find in spite of theory 

 that circumstances continually arise in which individual 

 and social ends come into collision ? Is not the problem 

 of their relative priority being continually set, in different 

 ages and to different peoples? Is it not necessary that 

 we should give precedence either to social ends as being 

 more comprehensive and permanent, or to personal ends 

 as being more immediately imperative and more valuable 

 in so far as, from the moral point of view, "character" 

 must have the first place ? Must we not, in the last resort, 

 either regard society as means to personal ends, or indi- 

 viduals as instruments of the social purpose? And is it 

 not one of the best features of the moral life of the present 

 day that it is turning its back upon the Individualism of 

 the past age, and giving definite priority, at least in theory, 

 to the more universal conditions of social well-being? 



I should answer these questions by saying that what has 

 really been gained is a better explanation of the individual 

 and a deeper insight into that which constitutes his well- 

 being. We are passing beyond the stage at which public 

 and private ends can be opposed in this abstract way, and 

 beginning to ask whether there are any legitimate social 

 ends that do not find their goal in the individual, or any 

 legitimate personal ends that are not genuinely social in 

 content. Iftheends of society and _those of thjMjidiyicUial 

 come into collision, it is because both society and theJudL 

 victual arenT contradiction with themselves. The conflict 

 arises because either the individual or the society has 

 blundered and sought an illegitimate end, even from its 



