1895,] Psychology. 1129 
To this argument M. Tarde replies by reaffirming the prevalent view 
that crime is hurtful to society, and therefore a menace to progress, 
contests Prof. Durkheim’s attempt to exclude from the definition of the 
normal the teleological element and concludes, most unhappily, as I 
think, with a protest against the admission of “science,” reason’s off- 
spring, as the supreme guide of life to the exclusion of “the heart, the 
soul, the imagination.” To which Prof. Durkheim calmly replies by 
admitting all his opponent can say as to the evil effect of crime; his 
sole point is that crime is an inevitable outcome of the laws of life, 
must therefore be regarded as normal, and is both indirectly and 
directly advantageous, in spite of its disadvantages. 
Although surrendering no one of his original arguments, the tone of 
this reply is very different from that of his first statement. The enthu- 
siasm of the iconoclast has given way to the determination of one con- 
vinced of his point, although apparently anxious to overlook its prac- 
tical consequences. 
The fallacies in Prof. Durkheim’s argument are evident enough, 
although M. Tarde fails to see them. They lie in the ambiguity of the 
words normal and crime. “ Normal” properly means “ conformable to 
type,” or “conformable to the standard.” The type is primarily de- 
termined by the average of instances, and has no direct reference to 
the end subserved. We may thus regard a given scrap of stone, a 
case of typhoid fever as normal, i. e., as types of their kind, without any 
covert teleological reference. But, when, in any given class, con- 
duciveness to a given end is a relatively constant feature, it necessarily 
becomes embedded in the type-concept and the latter becomes teleologi- 
cal. It would thus be impossible to define a normal knife without 
explicitly or implicitly including fitness for cutting as one of its 
elements. When the end subserved is generally advantageous, a ten- 
dency manifests itself to enforce upon individuals conformity to the 
type and the latter thus assumes to the consciousness of the community 
the form of a standard to which one ought to conform. Again, since 
in the realm of nature constant features are usually due to the opera- 
tion of fixed laws, the normal in the first sense is frequently necessary. 
But the normal is not always necessary, as it is not necessary that a 
human adult be above three feet in height, although the normal adult 
is. The word “abnormal” is not the simple negative of “ normal,” 
but is properly the negative of its second sense only. “ Morbid” and 
“ pathological ” are used in yet narrower sense. When we endeavor to 
discover the concept “normal” in the phenomena of life, we meet 
with a new difficulty. The phenomena of life are always manifested 
77 
