8i8 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



takes to prove that " the original and elementary fact in society is the 

 consciousness of kind." This is the determining principle to which 

 all social phenomena are to be referred.* But Professor Giddings's 

 sociological postulate has been promptly rejected by his American 

 colleagues, Prof. Albion W. Small and Mr. Lester F. Ward. The 

 former speaks contemptuously of the consciousness of kind as a re- 

 mote metaphysical category, and declares that the whole system of 

 sociology based on the principle is " an impossible combination of con- 

 tradictions." f This opinion is approved by Ward, who riddles Gid- 

 dings's book with criticism, and complains of the author's inability to 

 handle principles correctly.:}: 



It is hardly necessary to penetrate further into this debate over 

 first principles. The most exhaustive examination of the writings 

 of the leaders in sociological thought would fail to discover any fun- 

 damental unity of opinion. The so-called principles of the science 

 are multiform. They represent merely the unsupported conclusions 

 of individual thinkers. If we except the barest commonplaces, no 

 truths have been established; no scientific laws have been agreed upon. 

 The content of the science of sociology, as expounded in treatises bear- 

 ing this name, varies with the particular bias of the writer. In fine, 

 there are systems of sociology galore, but there is hardly a sociology. 



Of the various systems of sociology that have been developed since 

 the new " science " was first outlined by Auguste Comte, that of Her- 

 bert Spencer is undoubtedly the most coherent and self-consistent. 

 But even the genius of Mr. Spencer has been unequal to the task 

 of working out a body of firmly grounded principles which should 

 furnish a basis for the convergence of opinion on social questions. 

 He has not succeeded in giving permanent form and content to 

 sociology. His work is disparagingly criticised by other living 

 sociologists. Small declares that " Spencer's sociology ends precisely 

 where sociology proper should begin," and quotes approvingly De 

 Greef's assertion that " Mr. Spencer not only fails to show that there 

 is a place for sociology, but his own reasoning proves more than 

 anything else that there is no social science superior to biology." 

 Ward, while commending the logical consistency of Mr. Spencer's 

 work, pronounces him " unsystematic, nonconstructive, and nonpro- 

 gressive." 



There is much justice in these criticisms of Mr. Spencer's system. 

 His sociology is almost entirely descriptive; and his description of 

 social phenomena has taken the form of an elaborate analogy between 



* See Giddings. Principles of Sociology, chap. i. 



f In American Journal of Sociology, September, 1896. 

 % In Annals of the American Academy, July, 1896. 



* Small and Vincent. Introduction to the Study of Society, p. 46. 



