Scientific Methods in Sociology 117 



This illustration is the more remarkable coming 

 from one of the greatest philosophers of our time 

 and one who has protested with such power against 

 the metaphysical spirit. As soon as he penetrates 

 into the domain of social phenomena, he falls into 

 the most abstract reasoning. Comte failed to see 

 the simple fact that in order that conquerors might 

 be able to obtain food from their victims, it is 

 necessary that the victims should first have pro- 

 duced a supply of food from the earth. War, 

 then, is not the most simple means of procuring 

 subsistence. On the contrary it is a very complex 

 means, since it is a means of at least two degrees; 

 involving first, the production of a food supply 

 by the victims, and second, the series of acts 

 necessary in order that the conqueror may seize 

 that supply. When one tribe of Indians falls 

 upon another tribe, conquers it, and seizes its 

 corn, the effort required for this war of conquest 

 is employed for purely destructive purposes and 

 does not add a single ear of corn to the available 

 supply. The corn comes from the earth and is 

 produced by labour, and the massacre of the 

 labourers who produce it does not increase their 

 productiveness. 



Comte, moreover, on account of a failure of 

 reasoning which is one of the most widespread of 

 our intellectual defects, thinks only of the con- 

 queror. If the statement is laid down as represent- 

 ing a general law, how is it possible to affirm that 

 war is the most simple means of procuring sub- 



