534 HEREDITY AND SELECTION IN SOCIOLOGY 



definition a social phenomenon ? Does it not mean that religion 

 can never be based on individual judgment and individual 

 reason alone, but that it implies a sanction for the individual 

 derived from a principle which is higher than the individual ? 

 And, conversely, if society can be assured of stabiHty only on 

 condition that it be strongly integrated by common recognition 

 of a sanction which must be, as nearly as possible a sanction 

 quad semper, quod ubique, quod omnibus ; if this sanction must 

 necessarily be a suprasocial sanction, not inherent in, but ex- 

 ternal to, society ; if, in other words, the stabiUty and cohesion 

 of a society depend on the strength of its religious beliefs ; may 

 we not, therefore, say that every social collectivity is also a 

 religious collectivity ? And let us not be led into error by 

 sociologists who tell us that religion is a bygone superstition, 

 and that we must set about finding a new code of social morahty. 

 What is this new code of social morality, if not an essentially 

 supra-rational and suprasocial principle, the object of which 

 is to integrate society by giving to social life a sanction possess- 

 ing the essential requisite of universahty ? If morality is 

 postulated as a principle of social integration, then it is postulated 

 as a principle which is higher than society, external to society, 

 suprasocial as it is also supra-rational. That is to say, that it 

 is a religion — a new religion, perhaps, but a rehgion none the 

 less. For morality can never be detached from supra-rationalism. 

 EationaHst morality, if it be logical, tells us that we must 

 eat and drink, for to-morrow we die ; it must be Hmited to the 

 individual ; it must give to the individual as supreme object 

 during the short space of existence the attainment of the 

 maximum of personal pleasure. It is in hedonism, or in the 

 doctrine of Max Stirner, that we find the logical consequences 

 of Eationahsm applied to morality ; and perhaps, as Eduard 

 von Hartmann suggests, it is because Max Stirner is so ferociously 

 logical that he is so conveniently ignored by many. But when 

 morality intervenes, when we appeal to a principle which is 



