NATURE 



449 



THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER S, 1904. 



SOCIAL TYPES .LVD SOCIAL SELECTIOX. 



.Is/x-r/x of Social Evolution. First Series. Tempera- 

 ments. By J. Lionel Tayler, M.R.C.S. Pp. 

 xxviii + 297; illustrated. (London: Smith, Elder 

 and Co.) Price ys. 6d. 



A RE they not methodologically equivalent, the three 

 /v systems of classiflcation — (a) of plants into 

 herbs, shrubs and trees; (b) of animals into birds, 

 beasts and fishes ; and (c) of humans into the sanguine, 

 the lymphatic, the bilious and the melancholy? Why, 

 then, is it that science, having long ago given us a 

 Svstcma Xaturae and a nomenclature hotanicus 

 and zoologicus, still leaves us almost without the rudi- 

 ments of a Systema Hominis and a nomenclature 

 sociologicus? It may be asked in reply. What of the 

 anthropologists and their half century of taxonomic 

 labours in the name of science? But the anthropo- 

 logical classifications belong, in appearance at least, 

 to natural and not human history. They do not rise 

 through psychology into sociology. It is true the 

 biologist rejects them, and must continue to do so, as 

 long as the anthropologist cannot formulate his funda- 

 mental concept — that of race — in biological terms. 

 Of late the anthropologist has shown signs of attach- 

 ing himself to the psychologist; and this suggests 

 another form of the initial question, Why have 

 anthropologists not endeavoured to formulate even a 

 provisional classification of ps}xhological types? Why 

 have they, with unconscious nai\'ete, been content to 

 accept implicitlv the popular classification that 

 traditionally survives from early Greek thought? To 

 this question the positivist will be ready with his 

 answer, but perhaps it were wiser to leave it as a 

 shameful reminder to the laggard sociologist. 



During the past few years there ha\-e appeared, 

 notably in France and in America, a considerable 

 number of systematic studies of psychological types. 

 Dr. Tayler 's book is the first systematic endeavour 

 towards taxonomic psychology in this country. 

 Written without reference to foreign sources, it testi- 

 fies the more convincingly to the presence of a general 

 movement of thought. Though tardily manifesting 

 itself here in systematic form, yet the movement is 

 conspicuously marked by British initiative. By 

 postulating (in " Hereditary Genius," 1869) the vari- 

 ability of psychological type and the correlation of this 

 variability with national history, Francis Galton made 

 a pioneer advance of the first importance in linking 

 psychology with sociology and both with biology. A 

 way was thus opened for several new lines of research, 

 of which some have been considerably developed. Of 

 these two only call for reference here— (a) taxonomic 

 studies of character and temperament, alluded to 

 above as being prosecuted mainly by French psycho- 

 logists like Paulhan, Ribery and Fouillee, and bv 

 American sociologists like Giddings, Patten and 

 -Adams; and (fe) evolutionist studies seeking to de- 

 xN'O. 1819, VOL. 70] 



cipher selective processes in history and in con- 

 temporary civilisation whereby certain types are 

 eliminated and others encouraged. Of these latter 

 investigators, notable examples are Lapouge, .Seeck, 

 .\mmon, Hansen, &c. 



Dr. Tayler 's book belongs to both these lines of 

 research, and contributes original mateHal — both 

 observational and speculative — to each. To the more 

 taxonomic side, Dr. Tavler contributes (a) studies of 

 several selected types affirmed to be of a highly re- 

 presentative social character; (b) the suggestion that 

 the functioning of certain glands (especially the sexual 

 ones) is a main factor in determining temperaments, 

 and hence the idea that from this source are derivable 

 principles of division for a natural classification of 

 temperaments. To the more evolutionist side Dr. 

 Tayler contributes the conceptions of domestic selec- 

 tion and occupational selection as dominant factors in 

 that complex of historical processes which collectively 

 are increasingly described as social selection in contra- 

 distinction to natural selection. 



The salient feature of the book is the contrast set 

 up between two opposed series of types. The one 

 series is composed of variants on the type generalised 

 by popular observation in the " John Bull " concept. 

 The other series, in contrast to the first, is characterised 

 by (a) a more delicate and complex physiological 

 organisation attuned to an increasing complexity of 

 environment; (b) a more complete and subtle sexual 

 differentiation, both physical and psychical; (c) a 

 relatively greater subordination of carnal to culture 

 interests ; and {d) readier response to the social ideals 

 created by art, sanctioned by religion, formulated by 

 science. For these two contrasted series of socio- 

 logical types observable in contemporary western 

 civilisation, Dr. Tayler uses the titular designation of 

 "primitive" and "evolved." While remaining true 

 as a general characterisation, yet these words will 

 need to be supplemented by more specific designations 

 should a sound working hypothesis result from Dr 

 Tayler 's observations. Mr. Galton 's coinage, eugenics, 

 having been widely accepted, suggests further 

 utilisation. In respect of the robuster, coarser, more 

 carnal and materialist type, the word palaeogenic 

 would at once resume its observational basis and leave 

 scope for further terminological development in the 

 study of type variants and their social environment. 

 In the same way the correlative word neogenic would 

 designate the contrasted order, whether of environ- 

 ment or of organism, characterised bv the finer, 

 subtler, more cultural and idealist type. 



Grant the conception of the two contrasted series of 

 palasogenic and neogenic types as a fundamental 

 principle of division in the classification of human 

 types of character, and the centre of interest shifts to 

 other than taxonomic issues. What, we ask, is or 

 can be known of the historical development of these 

 types in individual and racial evolution ; what of the 

 interaction between themselves as individuals and as 

 groups ; what of their environmental interrelation- 

 ships ; what of their future phases of evolution ; what 

 modification may be consciously devised ; what ideals 

 consciously promoted? And, moreover, each of these 



U 



