3i8 TJie Theory of Genetic Modes 



organization of the social relationships zvitJiin the grotip. 

 Professor Pearson seems to see this later on where he 

 points out what he calls ' sociaHsm,' which he makes the 

 'interest individuals have in organizing themselves owing 

 to the intense struggle which is ever waging between 

 society and society ; this tendency to social organization, 

 always prominent in progressive communities, is a direct 

 outcome of the fundamental principle of evolution.' 

 Surely an easy way to solve the problem of social evolu- 

 tion ! Is it because and in view of the ' intense struggle 

 between society and society ' that social organization takes 

 place ? This does not follow, even though we admit that 

 natural selection acts to preserve societies which are * fit * 

 in this respect. 



Would not a single social group on an island in the 

 Pacific sooner or later effect social organization and make 

 progress, provided they had the mental equipment 1 

 Are there not certain characters intrinsically of a social 

 sort that make it possible — yes, necessary — for society 

 to exist } Can struggle and survival be a sufficient ac- 

 count of the actual evolution of English Economic His- 

 tory, let us say, of the rise and development of British 

 idealism, or of the evolution of republican principles 

 in France } History is a science principally of social 

 thoughts, ideals, psychological give-and-take, not mainly 

 of wars, considered as a form of struggle for existence, 

 which define and perpetuate the group-type in which 

 this or that social organization takes place, however 

 much importance we may give to the latter in its own 

 sphere. 



(2) Professor Pearson fails to give any place to the 

 psychological factors, apart from such * physiological 



