8 W. G. LangicorlJuj Tajjlor 



covery of economic truth. Economic criticism, which passes 

 completely by this concept, dispenses with it, and attempts to 

 satisfy itself with endless considerations of individual cases, 

 must proceed upon the assumption either that the larger concept 

 is logically false and impossible, or that it cannot be made to 

 bear fruit in practice. To the former of these objections the 

 writer will now address himself. 



The logical basis of the concept of a general or typical 

 solidarity of social interests is to be found in the doctrine of the 

 relativity of truth. If economic truth [e. g. a. standard of value) 

 is relative to economic epochs, then the interests of the epochs 

 must be capable of consideration severally as units. Broadly 

 speaking, a social norm is simply a truth relative to society. 

 Such a truth is entirely independent of personal considerations 

 and interests. It embodies the interests of society alone. The 

 interests of society are most readily presented to the mind as 

 the public point of view, not in the sense of public opinion, but 

 in the sense of that point of view which unfolds real public 

 welfare. 



Political economy is the study of private affairs from the 

 public point of view. Departure from this rule is sure to end 

 in error. The physician who contents himself with topical 

 treatment, lightly assuming that it must be good because it 

 produces or pretends to produce topical effects, kills his pa- 

 tient; and the statesman who pursues an analogous course to 

 the neglect of sound principles of social hygiene, ruins society. 

 The error arises from sympathy uncontrolled by broad judg- 

 ment. It is perceived that some individual or class is injured, 

 and the assumption is rashly made that the injury is remediable 

 by topical treatment. The inquiry should be, what treatment 

 will so increase the social ivelUbeing that the individual or class 

 in question will be relieved of its burdens. This is the utmost 

 extent to which an individual or class can claim the economist's 

 attention. This question is distinct and leads to distinct prac- 



170 



