HERBERT SPENCER 33 
entirely a process of unconscious, gradual adjustment by means 
of such phenomena as increase of population together with 
economic pressure, conflict of groups, psychic interaction be- 
tween individuals and the group and such super-organic products 
as tools, language, knowledge, laws, and works of art.1_ Social 
evolution further results from the inheritance of acquired adapta- 
tions both biological and sociological? and by the natural selec- 
tion.’ That group will survive, grow and ultimately “ possess 
the land” that has the best family system, the most efficient 
methods of production and distribution and the best government. 
Spencer recognizes only two distinct stages of social progress, 
the military and industrial. Compulsory co-operation is character- 
istic of the former, voluntary co-operation of the latter. Under 
militarism we have social progress by multiplication of homogene- 
ous units, grouping and compound grouping with ever increasing 
efficiency of organization and division of labor. Under indus- 
trialism little corporate activity is required® hence a less compli- 
cated and centralized political organization.6 The contrast is 
well expressed thus: “ In a society organized for militant action, 
the individuality of each member has to be so subordinated in 
life, liberty and property, that he is largely or completely owned 
by the state. . . . Under the industrial régime the citizen’s in- 
dividuality, instead of being sacrificed by the society, has to be 
defended by the society. Defence of his individuality becomes 
the society’s essential duty.” ? 
When, according to Spencer, with the abolition of inter-group 
conflict “‘ there remains only the industrial struggle for existence, 
the final survival and spread must be on the part of those societies 
which produce the largest number of the best individuals, — 
individuals best adapted for life in the industrial state.’’® 
With simplification and decentralization of government, how- 
ever, comes an increase of industrial organization, yet not at the 
expense of individual freedom as in the former case.? Industrial- 
1 Sociology, i, pp. 11 ff. 2 Tbid., p. 549. 
3 Ibid., p. 652; ii, pp. 601, 268, 569 f., 610; iii, pp. 581 f. 
4 Ibid., i, pp. 466 ff.; ii, pp. 568 ff. 7 Ibid., p. 607. 
5 Ibid., ii, pp. 606 f. 8 [bid., ii, p. 610. 
8 Tbid., p. 612. § Ibid., pp. 613, 632. 
