154 ADAPTATION AND PROGRESS 



Sumner carries his discussion on to the development of the 

 " ethos " or group character,^ — a concept corresponding to that 

 of " soul " as used by Le Bon. The greater part of the book is 

 given to illustrations of the above principles concerning the 

 development of such mores as slavery, abortion, infanticide, 

 killing of the old, cannibalism, sex relations, and those connected 

 with social codes, kinship, blood revenge, primitive justice, social 

 harlotry, etc. 



Although principal attention is given to the spontaneous devel- 

 opment of folkways and mores, Sumner makes place for criticism 

 and improvement. As these can come only from the elite, he 

 advocates critical ability as an important element in education. 

 " It is only by high mental discipline," he says, " that we can be 

 trained to rise above that atmosphere [of the mores] and form 

 rational judgments on current cases. This mental independence 

 and ethical power are the highest products of education." ^ 

 Further on he says, " In the organization of modern society the 

 schools are the institutional apparatus by which the inheritance 

 of experience and knowledge, — the whole mental outfit of the 

 race, — is transmitted to the young. . . . The transmission 

 ought to be faithful, but not without criticism. The reaction of 

 free judgment and taste will keep the mores fresh and active, and 

 the schools are undoubtedly the place where they should be 

 renewed through intelligent study of their operation in the past." ^ 

 Social evolution is thus, with Sumner, almost entirely a passive 

 process, individuals and groups working out their salvation in 

 proportion to a fortunate selection of ways of acting. Rational 

 choice is very rare, even among the most highly-civilized races. 



Simfiner is open to criticism chiefly at two points, first, in his 

 use of the neo-Darwinian formula without proving that it works 

 the same in social as in biological evolution, and second, in his 

 failure to bring out clearly the difference between the right and 

 good as seen by the people and the right and good as seen by the 

 elite and demonstrated as such by consequences.'* From this 

 point of view we might substitute for Sumner^s, " The mores are 



* Folkways, pp. 70 f . * Ibid., p. 532. * Ibid., p. 635. 



* Cf. Hobhouse, Morals in Evolutjon, pp. 26 f. 



