Struggle not Extermination of Kind 65 



Similarly with social organisms. We must recog- 

 nize the truth that the struggle for existence between 

 societies has been instrumental to their evolution. 



The first objection which presents itself is a 

 biological one. It is strange that Spencer did not 

 realize that his argument was inconsistent. The 

 unceasing warfare between species, he says, is the 

 cause of both growth and organization, that is, of 

 the appearance of more perfect types. Since the 

 Paleozoic Age all the species, without exception, 

 have been subjected to the pressure of the struggle 

 for existence. Why is it then that certain species 

 have evolved to a being as high as man, while 

 others have remained at a more rudimentary 

 stage of life? The struggle for existence cannot 

 be the sole cause of the evolution of species. 

 There must be other causes which we do not 

 know. 



From the point of view of sociology, however, it 

 is not this biological objection which is of the 

 greatest interest. It is the immense leap which 

 Spencer makes in applying the definite analogy 

 to human society. He speaks of the struggle 

 between animals and then, without any transition 

 or explanation, says: "Similarly with social 

 organisms." It is astonishing to find an eminent 

 philosopher making such an elementary error. 

 This is an example of the kind of errors of which 

 Darwin complains in one of his letters, in which he 

 said: "How curious it is that several of my re- 



5 



