THEORIES OF INDIVIDUALITY 27 



from the authority of one person and its transmission to 

 others, or from that of consensus of opinion, but in either 

 case it is not the act of exchange nor its character which 

 determines this order but the order that determines the 

 exchange and its character. The orderly union of hu- 

 man beings to form an individuahty which shows the 

 most various degrees of individuation from the family 

 through the clan and tribe, etc., to the highly developed 

 modern state is based primarily on authority of some 

 kind and its transmission, not upon the material relation 

 of the production and transportation of substances. 

 When this union of men exists, no matter how primitive 

 its character, the substances which it receives in ex- 

 change may play a very important part in determining 

 the character and course of its further development. If 

 the unity of the organic individual is in any way com- 

 parable with that of these composite social individuals, 

 it is evident that it must originate in some ordering or 

 controlling factor which makes possible the existence 

 and orderly and definite arrangement of specific parts. 

 These two types of relation — authority or dominance 

 of some sort and its transmission to subordinate parts 

 and the production and transportation of substances — 

 represent the two kinds of relation possible between 

 persons, organs, cells or parts of a cell, so far as direct 

 mechanical relations of contact, pressure, or tension 

 are not concerned. The unity of the social individual 

 evidently depends primarily upon the transmissive 

 rather than the transportative kind of relation. If 

 the organic individual is in any way comparable to it 

 we might reasonably expect to find the same thing 

 true there. 



