144 ADAPTATION AND PROGRESS 
Durkheim recognizes that society by reglementation must 
furnish equality of opportunity for all and prevent that injustice 
which is the result of external restraint based on any other 
principle than that of ability. But society must go further than 
he suggests. It must train its members to perform those func- 
tions most needed by society, and when the need of the group is 
made the standard of the value of the individual to the group we 
will have to change the current conception of natural capacity 
and ability. 
While indebted to Durkheim for his elaboration of the concept 
of social solidarity based on consciousness of kind and expressed 
in repressive right, we are more indebted to him for his insistence 
that consciousness of supplementary difference is both a cause 
and a result of division of labor, and that division of labor is both 
a cause and result of social solidarity... Though he holds that this 
social solidarity and social consciousness are objective and real 
with laws different from those of biology or individual-psychology, 
yet he recognizes that it has no organic substratum corresponding 
to that of individual consciousness. 
Fouillée and Le Bon have been, perhaps, among the ablest 
critics of this social realism, as it has been called,? but out of the 
controversy has come the truth now generally recognized that 
there is a psychical somewhat over against the individual which 
determines his life at least in general outline. This “‘ somewhat ”’ 
may be organized as a fraternity, church, or state, but in any case 
it is the great moulding and assimilating force in society. As in 
each organization there is need of division of labor, and as along 
with consciousness of kind man has a consciousness of supple- 
mentary difference, so in each organization we find diversity of 
capacity and temperament yet fused into one whole, made the 
stronger, usually, by the very fact of these differences. 
Now every such “unity” is subject to the general law of 
adaptation. Not only does it react passively to its social environ- 
ment, but to succeed in the highest degree it must take thought. 
1 For an opposite view, see Taussig, Principles of Economics, i, p. 38. 
° Yet there is practically no difference between the fundamental conception of 
Durkheim and his critics. Cf. Fouillée, Psychologie du peuple frangais, pp. 10 f. 
