FORMULAE OF SOCIAL PROGRESS 199 
Professor Baldwin is open to criticism especially at two points: 
first, in the loose way in which he uses the term imitation and 
second for his failure to give definite content to those various 
unities that make up quasi-personalities. We have in fact 
different ‘‘ societies’ with different ideals, and as one person 
is brought under the influence of varying and often conflicting 
ideals, the result is a greater diversity and confusion in the inner 
life of the individual than provided for in Baldwin’s theory; 
yet on the whole perhaps no author has contributed more to the 
development of the concept of adaptation as a social theory, 
especially as pertaining to morals and religion. To his ascending 
series of “‘ struggles,”’ — between individuals in the lower species 
of animals, between groups in the higher, and in human society, 
struggle for a living, for place, and excellence,! — we would add a 
final form, — struggle for social achievement? 
Henry Drummond (1851-1897) 
Struggle for the Life of Others 
Drummond’s great contribution to social philosophy is in 
supplementing the law of struggle for existence with that of 
“ struggle for the life of others” having its mainspring in that 
disposition or sentiment termed love. ‘‘ Experience,” he says, 
“tells us that man’s true life is neither lived in the material 
tracts of the body, nor in the higher altitudes of the intellect, but 
in the warm world of the affections.” * This fact which Comte 
emphasized in his Polity, Drummond endeavored to explain 
through biology. He shows that love is not a resultant of strug- 
gle for existence but is rooted in the primal activity of reproduc- 
tion by cell division. ‘ Even at its dawn life is receiver and 
giver; even in protoplasm is selfism and otherism.” 
“ The two main activities of all living things,” he holds, “ are’ 
nutrition and reproduction. . . . The object of nutrition is to 
secure the life of the individual; the object of reproduction is to 
secure the life of the species. . . . The first has a purely personal 
1 The Individual and Society, ch. III. Cf. infra, ch. XIV. 
2 For further criticism, see infra, p. 308 f. 
3 The Ascent of Man, p. 215. 4 Ibid., pp. 225 f. 
