NEO-DARWINIAN SOCIOLOGISTS 87 
pictures the misery of the exploited classes in industrial centers 
and seems to feel that all this is natural and necessary, — neces- 
sary for the good of the social organism with special emphasis 
on unborn generations.1 
Having read the first three chapters with emphasis on rivalry 
between individuals as a basis of selection, — though he fails to 
indicate how there can be selection for he admits that the masses 
who do not succeed leave the largest number of offspring,? — one 
is surprised to find later that Mr. Kidd repudiates the commonly 
accepted belief among biological sociologists concerning the 
differential in average mental capacity between primitive and 
modern man.? His view seems to be that with the advent of 
man natural selection turned to the production of those qualities 
of character which make for group efficiency such as energy, 
vigor,‘ virility, courage, integrity > and simple-minded devotion 
to conceptions of duty,® but he fails to show how these qualities 
are produced. He lays great stress on the increasing prevalence 
of the doctrine of the equality of all men and traces this to “‘ the 
great fund of altruistic feeling generated by the ethical system 
upon which our civilization is founded,” 7— but he does not 
furnish a shred of evidence that this feeling is due to selection 
rather than to the increase of co-operation, intercourse and educa- 
tion. Indeed as to the other qualities which he holds to be of 
supreme worth in the individuals of the successful group, — these 
are the result of a complex of physical and social conditions and 
by no means solely the product of selection. In other words, 
there is no more reason for believing that the western nations 
excel others in the social and religious instincts than there is for 
believing that they excel in average mental ability. 
The struggle between groups results, as Kidd shows, in the 
survival of the groups that on the whole are best adapted to the 
conditions of life in which they are placed, and survival power 
depends not only on the social efficiency of the individual mem- 
bers, but on the efficiency of the social organization.2 It depends 
1 Social Evolution, ch. II. 5 Tbid., p. 61. 
2 Ibid., pp. 278 f., 372, 384. 8 Tbid., p. 349. 
3 Ibid., ch. TX. 7 Ibid., p. 182. 
4 Ibid., p. 58. 8 Ibid., pp. 68 f. 
