Eugenics, Euthenics, and Eudemics Author(s): Lester F. Ward Reviewed work(s): Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 18, No. 6 (May, 1913), pp. 737-754 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2763324 . Accessed: 04/04/2012 14:42 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
THE AMERICAN
JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY VOLUME
MAY
XVIII
I9I3
NUMBER
6
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS, AND EUDEMICSx LESTER F. WARD Brown University
EUGENICS ARTIFICIAL
SELECTION
WhenCharlesDarwin,in his greatworkon VariationsofAnimalsand PlantsunderDomestication, publishedin i868, taughtthe ofartificial wholeworldthemarvelousefficiency selection,it was no wonderthat the idea of applyingit to the humanrace should have occurredto many. His talentedcousin,FrancisGalton,was thefirstpubliclyto suggestsuchan application. He had used the word" stirp fortheprimary bearersofheredity, and he perceived thatin theimprovement ofcerealsand fruittrees,and thebreeding of domesticanimals,man had beenengagedpractically in thecultureofhereditary stirps. 112
STIRPICULTURE
In an article on "HereditaryImprovement,"publishedin Fraser'sMagazineforJanuary,I873, he had used theword"viriand culture"(p. II9) forwhat he now renamed"stirpiculture," I
A lecture delivered beforethe Federation for Child Study in New York, on
January 30,
1913.
2In a paper entitled,"A Theory of Heredity,"read beforethe Anthropological Instituteof Great Britain,November 9, 1875, and publishedearliestin the ContemporaryReviewfor December, I875, where the word is used and explained on p. 8i, and soon afterin the JournaloftheInstitute,V, No. 3 (January,I876), wherethe same
passage occurson p.
330.
737
738
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
his claim that mankindmightbe made the beneficiary of this reasonable. But sucha captipotentprincipleseemedaltogether vatingidea could not fail to be seized upon by charlatansand carriedto unwarrantable lengths,and verysoon the term"stirpiculture"had degenerated and becomeobjectionableto all refined natures. Galton was therefore compelledto abandonit and to adopt anotherwhichcouldnot be so easilyprostituted to coarse sensualends,and in I883 he introducedtheword"eugenics"I for practicallythe same idea. This termhas beenkeptfairlywithin thepale ofscience,butit has almostset theworldon fire,and now ofall classes. Many see in eugenics seemsto engrosstheattention theregeneration ofmankind. Is therea rationalbasis forthis,or is it onlya temporary popular"craze," doomedto collapseaftera shortperiod? NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE
EUGENICS
Dr. C. W. Saleeby2has clearlypointed out that eugenics embracestwo quite different fields,whichhe veryappropriately calls negativeeugenicsand positiveeugenics,respectively.Negathementaland tiveeugenicsrelatesto theproblemofpreventing physicaldefectivesof society fromperpetuatingtheir defects through propagation. Positiveeugenicsrelatesto theproblemof improving themassofmankindby theselectionof thesuperiorin theprocessofreproduction. It is clearthattheseare twoentirely distinctproblems. As the are thewardsofsociety,societyhas somewhatthesame defectives controloverthemas intelligent menhave overthevegetableand and thereis no good reasonwhyit shouldnot animalkingdoms, act in the same way withregardto them,and eliminateas completelyand as rapidlyas possiblethe worthlesselementsin the due to population. Nothing but an inexcusableindifference, In his book entitled,InquiriesintoHuman Facultyand Its Development, London, He here says: "The investigationof human eugenics-that is, of the conditionsunder which men of a high type are produced-is at presentextremely hamperedby the want of full familyhistories,both medical and general,extending over threeor fourgenerations." He does not even italicize the wordhere,and it is evidentthat in thus incidentallyusing it he had no idea of the role that it was soon destinedto play. 2 SociologicalReview(London), II (July,I909), 228. I
1883, p. 44.
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
739
state of society,pregeneralignoranceand the half-unconscious has been ventsthisbeingdone. This problem adequatelytreated and by the twolecturers whohave precededme on thisplatform, I willtherefore makeno attemptto treatit myself. POSITIVE
EUGENICS
The greatproblemremains,the problemof positiveeugenics. it is beyondquestion. The powerof an The principleunderlying intelligent beingto modifyto almostany extentthe qualitiesof organisms overwhichsucha beinghas completecontrolhas been demonstratedbeyond a peradventure. Wrhy,then, may not and the humanrace be liftedup humannaturebe thusmodified, in the same way and to the same degreethat the vegetableand animalraceshave beenliftedup? In I89I I myselfsaid:' Artificial selection has givento manthemostthathe possessesofvalue
in the organicproductsof the earth. May not men and womenbe selected as well as sheep and horses? From the great stirpof humanitywith all its multipliedancestralplasms-some very poor, some mediocre,some merely indifferent, a goodlynumberrangingfrommiddlingto fair,only a comparativelyfewverygood, with an occasional crystalof the firstwater-fromall plan this,whymay we not learn to selecton some broad and comprehensive of the race of human witha view to a generalbuilding-upand rounding-out beings? At least we shouldby a rigidselectionstamp out of the futureall the whollyunworthyelements. Public sentimentshould be created in this shocked direction,and whenthe day comesthat societyshall be as profoundly at the crimeof perpetuatingthe least taintof hereditarydisease,insanity,or harmlesscrimeof incest, otherseriousdefectas it now is at the comparatively will have already been the way to practical and successfulstirpiculture2 found. I "Neo-Darwinism and Neo-Lamarckism,"annual addressof the presidentof the Biological Societyof Washington,deliveredJanuary24, i8gi, Proceedings,VI, 7I. 2 I had not at this date heard the word "eugenics," but the word "stirpiculture" was quite commonin America. In fact,even in England, it was supposed to be an Americanword. Thus, Mr. H. G. Wells,in discussingGalton's paper on "Eugenics," read beforethe Sociological Society of London on May i6, 1904, said: "'Eugenics,' whichis reallyonly a new word forthe popular Americanterm'stirpiculture,'seems to me to be a termthat is not withoutits misleadingimplications." See the report of that meetingpublishedin the AmericanJournalofSociologyforJuly,I904, X, II. To thisremarkof Mr. Wells, Mr. Galton replied(ibid.,pp. 24-25): "Mr. Wells spoke of 'stirpiculture'as a termpreferableto 'eugenics.' I myselfinventedit, and deliberately changedit for'eugenics."'
740
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
Indeedit seemedat first verysimple,butthemomenta practical arises. applicationof it is contemplated an insuperabledifficulty The controlofheredity is possibleonlyto a master-creature.Man is themaster-creature of the animalworld. Societyis themaster ofits defectives.But normalpeopleare theirownmasters. Historytellsof sumptuarylaws by whichkingscontrolledthe food and clothingof theirsubjects. This has all been longsincedone away. But the most extremesumptuarylaw would be liberty itselfcomparedwithany attempton thepartofsocietyto control the choiceofpartnersin theirmaritalrelations. This wouldbe a wouldfade into tyrannyby the side of whichall othertyrannies insignificance.
So clear had thisbecometo Galtonhimselfthat he had long confinedthepracticalteachingof positiveeugenicsto the idea of knownthat makingthelaws ofheredity so widelyand thoroughly and thusautomatically, peoplewouldpracticethemforthemselves, as it were,perfectthe humanrace. That thisis possibleno one will question,but thereare reasonswhyits successmustremain smallevenin themostenlightened communities. comparatively In thefirstplace,eugenistsare notusuallywillingto admitthe enormousforceof personalpreference.When two personsare attractedto each otherby thosesubtlelaws of theiremotional natures,theyare not likelyto inquirewhethertheyare fittedto maintainthe standardor improvethe qualityof the race. Howeverdeeplygroundedin the laws of hereditytheymay be, their blindsthemto all lack of harmonywithsuch passioncompletely laws. Even if theyattendto it, theyare sureto believethatno suchdeficiencies exist. We cannotimaginethemabandoningtheir intentionson that account. The numberof cases in whichthis wouldoccurwouldbe so extremely smallas to produceno appreciable effect uponsocietyor therace. In thesecondplace,Galtonwasnotwillingtoacceptthepopular view that Natureherselftendsto bringabout race improvement throughthe selectionof opposites. He even attemptedto prove froma fewstatisticalfacts,takenfromthe highestclasseswhere wouldbe mostlikelyto occur,thatthereversewas the exceptions andnotdifferent, qualities. case,and thatthesexespreferred similar,
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS, AND EUDEMICS
74I
The biologicalimperative.-There aremanywaysinwhichNature strivesto maintaina perfectrace,and evento improveit. I have groupedall thesetendencies together underthephrase"biological imperative,", and it constitutes one ofthemostsalutaryprinciples of sociology. Moreover,it is not recognizedor understoodby eugenists, whichis a seriousdefectin theirdoctrine. It is thevis medicatrix naturaeofsociety. A largepartofthedegeneracy ofthe higherclasses is due to the neglectof thisprinciple,and to the attempt,oftensuccessful, to defeatits normaloperation. There has beentoo muchinterference withNature'sways. Man assumes to knowbetterthanNaturehow to guidethe forcesof heredity. He sets up artificial the cateimperatives-thesocial imperative, goricalimperative-andhe therebythwartsNaturein herwholesometendencies, whichall lookto thevigoroftherace. It is these manifold socialand artificial restraints aboutrace thatare bringing degeneracy and socialdecadence. Thereis seriousdangerthatthe teachersof eugenicsmay take a falseroad,and, in so faras they can influence ratherthan humanselection, mayworkdeterioration amelioration. In thefirstplace,eugenicstendsto emphasizeundulytheintellectualqualities. Galton'swholeinterestwas centeredon herediis tarygenius. The onlykindof superiority generallyrecognized intellectualsuperiority.The only organ that it is sought to improveis thebrain. If theeugenistscouldcarryout theirplans the humanhead wouldbe enormously enlargedat the expenseof therestofthebody. This wouldsoonmakeit impossibleformen to be born,forobstetricians knowthatthehead is nowso unnaturallylargethatbirthis a greathardshipforwoman. for In thesecondplace,eugenists manifest moreorlesscontempt theaffective faculties. The emotional sideofman'snaturebecomes forthemmeresentimentality.Brains,intellect, genius,alonehave worth. Like thebreeders ofcattle,theywould"breedforpoints," and the head is the onlyorganthat theyseek to develop. But Natureis farwiser,and seeks to developall the facultiesand to preventall extremes. The normalbecomesthe ideal. A perfect raceis onethatis developedin all its qualities,physical,moral,and I
See PureSociology, p. 302.
742
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
intellectual.It is thisthatthebiologicalimperative aimsat, and if not interfered withby the doctrinaires of heredity, thiswillbe the result. THE
WELL
BORN
It is strangethatin thescienceof thewellbornall emphasisis laid on theill born. To readtheeugenicliterature onewouldinfer that the majorityof mankindare defectives. Genius
The United States Census showsthat thenum-
ber of mentallydefective(insaneand feebleminded)is about 333 per IOOJ,OO, orone-third Talet of i percent. Whileofcourseallowancemust be made forerrorsin thestatistics, and while thereare manyweak-minded personswhofail to be classed amongdefectives, still,afterall Above the corrections are made,the numberofdefectives / mean \ cannot exceed one-halfof i per cent of the population, leaving99.5 percentforthenormal classes. Galton talked as thoughit were possible Mediocrity to arrangeall the membersof societyin a seriesextending fromidiocyto genius,and he supposedthat the resultant wouldshow figure \ Bselow/ a regulargradation, such as Queteletfoundin the the stature of Belgiansoldiers,by measuring mean which he arrivedat his well-knownhomme moyen,which some facetiouslytranslate,the \"mean man." With Galtonthedefectives on the one hand and the geniuseson the other representmere "'deviationsfroma mean." That "mean" is thegreatmass,or mediocrity. Defective In his HereditaryGenius(p. 24) he givesa thedeviofQuetelet'sresults,indicating figure ations by lightershading. He does not give FIG.1 any figurefor mental deviations,but they might be representedby two triangleswith a commonbase and with the apices oppositeeach other,as in Fig. i. This view is sharedby Ribot and manyothers,and may be
AND EUDEMICS
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
743
regardedas the eugenicdoctrine. Ammon"showedthatit is not includes trueformentalphenomena, and thatthenormalcondition thebulkofthepopulation. On p. 53 ofthefirstedition,and p. 173 of the second,of his workon the Social Order,he givesa figure illustrating this,which,withthe omissionof somedetails,I have reproduced (Fig. 2). Genius
/
Talent\
~~~~~~~~ ~~Mecdiocrity) ~
(
\Feeble minded/ \
/Limit ofusefulness
FIG. 2
This is muchnearerto therealstateofthings,but stillgreatly exaggeratesthe mentallydefective. The geniusesare probably also exaggerated, because the existingstate of societydoes not enablethementalpowersto showthemselves.2Thereis scarcely to the normal any gradationfromthe insaneand feeble-minded as abrupt. condition,and the transitionshould be represented Much, too, thatis called geniusis pathologic,and belongsrather at the bottomalongwiththeinsane. A figurelikethaton p. 744 (Fig. 3) wouldcomemuchnearerthe truth. ' Otto Ammon,Die Gesellschaftsordnung und ihre natiirliclenGrundlagen,Jena,
1895; zweite verbesserteund vermehrteAuflage,I896. 2
See Applied Sociology,chap. ix.
744
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
But it is scarcelyworthwhileto tryto indicatetheamountof genius. We reallyknownothingabout it. All the estimatesare in something based on the actual numberwhohave accomplished of theworld,but this,as I have abundantlyshown,is no criterion theamountofrealgenius,becausethegreaterpartofit lies latent to manifest in the greatmass,and has neverhad an opportunity itself. The amountofvisiblegeniushas neverexceededone-tenth of i per cent,but it is provedthatat least twohundredtimesas of I percent Genius one-tenth the [Latentgenius and talentscatteredsomewhatequally throughout mass, amountingin all lines to at least 50 per cent,needing only to be called outj
Normalminded 90 percent
[Transitionfromdefectivesto normalnot gradual.but abrupt.the latter pathologic.l sound.theformer
Defectivesone-halfof I percent FIG. 3
much existsand mightbe broughtout. This would raise it to themanyformsthatgenius 20 per cent. But whenwe recognize thatsomemeasureofgenius takeswe cannotescapetheconclusion existsin nearlyeveryone. All this geniusis scatteredsomewhat thewholemass of thepopulation. through uniformly of thedefectiveeleNegativeeugenicsaims at the elimination ment. Positiveeugenicsseeksto increasethenumberof geniuses. This can be doneonlyfromtheranksofthenormal,i.e.,ofmediocrity. These, and also the superior,and even the geniuses,are intellectualimprovesupposedto be capable of almostindefinite
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
745
selection. This is at least a recognition mentthroughhereditary oftheexistenceofpotentialgenius. THE LIFE-IMPULSE
The greatestproblembeforethe worldtodayis thatof a universalupward tendencyin nature. One aspect of it has been called"vitalism,"or "neo-vitalism." But it is not less chemism and psychism. The biologistsare alarmedat it. They see in it thespecteroftheoldmetaphysical life-entity.Theyarefrightened at thebugbearof a life-god. But the discussionsshowthat they failto understand theprinciple. Properlyconceived,it is entirely scientific, and has nothingto do withReinke's"dominants"or Driesch's"entelechy"or "psychoid." Bergsontalks of an elan vital,leavingit doubtful,however,as to what he reallymeans. But the principleis not new. It has been dimlyseen by many trulygreatphilosophers.It has also been perceivedby men of science. The eminentbotanistNageliIclearlysaw it in theplant as thebasisofhissystem. The greatAmeriworld,and setit forth can botanist,Dr. Asa Gray,who was also a leadingexpounder of Darwin'sentiresystem,acceptedthisview,and says thatit was shared by anothergreat European botanist,AlexanderBraun. Criticizing theviewthatvariationhas no definite course,but takes placein all directions alike,he says: " Whatwe observein theseedbed doesnotsuggestthisview. Nageli,Braun,and myselfincline to the opinionthateach planthas an inherenttendencyto variationin certaingeneraldirections. "2 The factis thatit is always in an upwarddirection, towardhigherstructural perfection. What, then,is thisprinciple? At bottomit is the universal energyat workin all nature. We have onlyto recognizethat this universalenergyis constructive and creative,as I have so fully shown.3 It builds,and to it are due all the manifoldformsof existence-worlds, atoms,organisms, man, society. Evolutionis ' Carl Nageli, Entstehungund Begriffder naturkistorischen Art, zweite Auflage, Theorieder Abstammungslehre, Mulnchen,I865; Mechanisch-physiologische Leipzig, I884. 2 StructuralBotany,New York and Chicago, I879, p. 3I9. 3 Pure Sociology,pp. 79, I71.
746
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
a series,and it is also an ascendingseries. The "nisusofnature"" is constantlypushinghigherand higherstructures intoexistence. The historyofourearthis thehistoryofa seriesofascendingsteps in organicevolution. Each geologicage revealsthe presenceof highertypesof bothplantsand animalsthan the precedingage. the last stage The presentfloraand faunaof the globerepresent thusfarattainedin thisascendingseries. Towardtheend of the as thecrownoftheorganicprocess. But animallinemanemerged constitutes an ascendingseries,and his history, man himselfalso of theeugenists, is one ofprogressfromthe unaidedby theefforts lowestnature-mento thehighestculture-races. Thisprolonged spontaneousupwardmovementof the entireorganicworldis the resultofthatformoftheuniversalenergywhichinheresin thelifeprinciple,and whichmakes life a progressiveagent,mounting "throughall thespiresofform." The presenteugenicmovementis one of distrustof nature,of of feverishhaste to improvethe lack of faithin greatprinciples, world,of egotismin the assumptionof a wisdomsuperiorto that ofnature. If it couldhaveitswayit wouldthwartand distortthe spontaneousupwardmovement,and create an artificialrace of hydrocephalous pigmies. Fortunatelyits poweris limited,and can produceonly a rippleon the surfaceof society. EUTHENICS2
Is there,then,nothingto do? Are we to acceptthatmodem fatalismknownas laissezfaire,whichenjoinsthefolding scientific of the arms? Are we to preacha gospelof inaction? I forone am notcontentto do so,and I believethatnothing I have certainly withthemostvigorousaction,and that thusfarsaidis inconsistent in the directionof the betterment of the humanrace. The end and aim of the eugenistscannotbe reproached. The race is far I
DynamicSociology, II, 93, I78; PureSociology,pp.
22, I36.
Euthenics. The Science of Controllable Environment.A Plea for BetterLiving Conditionsas a First Step TowardHigherHuman Efficiency.By Ellen H. Richards, Boston, I9IO. Mrs. Richardsgives (p. vii) the etymologyof the wordand its classic uses. The centralthoughtseems to be that of materialprosperity. I shall use it as embracing practicallyall that Galton meant by "nurture." 2
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
747
fromperfect. Its conditionis deplorable. Its improvement is entirelyfeasible,and in the highestdegreedesirable. Nor do I refermerelyto economicconditions, to thepovertyand miseryof the disinherited classes. The intellectualstate of the worldis deplorable,and its improvement is clearlywithinthe reach of a questionof methodratherthanof societyitself. It is therefore principlethatconcernsus. THE HUMAN BRAIN
The brainofprimitive manwas so largeand so highlydeveloped that he reasonedhimselfinto all sortsof errors,whichhe has handeddownto us, and whichhave constituted the mostserious impediment to theprogressof the world. Cephalization, natural and sexual selection, especially selection, co-operated duringa long prehumanperiodto give to man a head and a brainmuch too largeforhis good,and whichhas beenforthemostparta biologically disadvantageouscharacter. It is only comingto servea usefulpurposein themostadvancedstagesofcivilization. Brain increaseis therefore notat all theneededthingfortheimprovement of the race. The chiefevilsof theworldhave been due to error, whichis a productof reason. Erroris in turnthe resultof the ignoranceof man of his environment, and his consequentfalse The it. of the worldhas been due to about reasoning progress scientific investigation, by whichthe truenatureof the environmenthas been made knownand the errorremoved. The thing of the race is therefore moreknowlneededforthe improvement edgeand notmorebrains. COMPETITION
in naturethereis a tendencyforthe avenuesof Everywhere progressto becomechokedand the normallyupwardmovement ofwhichI checkedor arrested. The risingtideofworld-progress, have spoken,has therefore always been rhythmic.A dynamic stateis converted intoa staticone,and kineticactivityintostagnation. The worldhas its restingstages,waitingforsome new ofpotential. In the influence to enterin and producea difference organicworldcompetition tendsconstantlyto keep the organism
748
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
far below its possibilitiesof development.In the strugglefor existenceeveryorganismthat survivesis arrestedon a comparativelylow plane. The survivalof the fittestis onlythe survival of low types adapted to a hostileenvironment.They are all strivingto rise to higherstagesunderthe spur of that inherent and alwayspushingupward whichis everywhere force,or life-urge, towardhigherand betterthings. Natureis literally"bound fast at work. Every forceseverywhere in fate" by the competitive plantand everyanimalpossessespotentialqualitiesfarhigherthan willallowit to manifest.' its environment selectionis due entirelyto this The signalsuccessof artificial is ignoredby thosewhoavail themhowever, principle. The truth, selvesof the principle. It is ignoredby eugenists,who imagine to the nativepowersofmen,whenall theyare addingsomething the fetterswithwhichnaturehas most to loose can do is at they or the horticulturist can bound them. All that the agriculturist that do, all thathe needsto do, is to removethehostileinfluences restrainthenativeenergiesof the vegetablekingdom,and permit thoseenergiesto liftthemto higherlevelsof existence. All that can do is to liberatecertainselectedpartsof the thestock-breeder andpermitthosepartsto expandbytheirinherent animalorganism, powers. All that the eugenistcould do, if he had fullpowerto humanbeingsin conformity withhis capriciousnotions transform ofwhatconstitutes wouldbe to setfreetheparticular improvement, elementsof humannaturethat he shouldselect,and watch the ofthosepotentialagenciesthathad beenhitherto cramped workings intoquiescence. But all thisis nurture, pureand simple. Natureis unchanged. remainthesame. Theseare beyondthe The hereditary tendencies thatholdstheheredireachofhumanart. It is theenvironment taryimpulsedown. Man has no poweroverheredity. The only thinghe can affectis the environment.It is truethat man can utilizethe laws of heredity. But the utilizationof any law of that the natureconsistssimplyin so adjustingthe environment the forces law shalloperatein his interest. It is merelydirecting I I set forththis principleand establishedit by numerousexamples as long ago as I876. See my article on "The Local Distributionof Plants and the Theory of Adaptation" in the Popular ScienceMonthlyforOctober,1876, IX, 676-84.
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
749
ofnatureintochannelsofhumanadvantage. But thosechannels belongto the environment. SPONTANEOUS VARIATION
Darwinrecognizedthe existenceof spontaneousvariation. In fact,he admittedthatit mustbe calledin to explainthefirststep in natural selection. Withoutit there would be nothingfor naturalselectionto lay holdof. Enamoredof the greatprinciple ofnaturalselection,biologists have fallenundertheillusionthatit explainseverything.But spontaneousvariationis a morefundamentalprinciple. It is priorin order,and it is universalin nature. It goeson alongwithnaturalselectionand in perfect harmony with it. It explainsgreatnumbersof factsthat naturalselectionis powerlessto explain. This latter can explain the biologically advantageousonly,whilethosechangeswhichare devoidofutility can be explainedby spontaneousvariationonly. I long ago emphasizedthisfactand illustratedit by strikingexamplesfrom my own specialfield.' I called it "fortuitous variation,"but the underwhichI thenlaboredthat phrasewas due to theimpression had used it. But it is thesameas his "spontaneDarwinhimself ous variation,"simplyemphasizingthe fact, whichso strongly appealed to me, that such variationstake place, as it were,by chance,and not because theyare useful. In point of fact,as I have repeatedlyshown,theyare due to that inherentimpulseof thewholeorganicworld,whichis perpetually pressingin all directo liftall lifeto higherlevels,and whichreally tions,and striving bringsabout organicevolution. THE ENVIRONMENT
It turnsout,then,thatafterall thediscussionofheredity, and thehopeshungupon theidea ofutilizingit in theinterestofrace improvement, it is a fixedquantitywhichno humanpowercan whichGaltonaffectedto despise, change,whilethe environment, I See a briefabstract,all that was ever published,of my paper on "Fortuitous Variationin the Genus Eupatorium,"in Nature,London, forJuly25, I889, XI, 3IO. On account of the importanceof the idea, even for sociology,and the completely buried conditionof this note, I reproducedthe essentialpart of it in Pure Sociology. See pp. 24I-42.
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
750
is not onlyeasilymodified, but is in realitytheonlythingthatis whichis theessential modified in theprocessofartificial selection, that can be principleof eugenicsitself. All the improvement broughtabout through any oftheapplicationsofthatartmustbe and cannotbe due to any changein nature, the resultofnurture, sincenatureis incapableof change. maybe regardedas Thereis a sensein whichthe environment in thewidestsense representing opposition.' It is theenvironment and holds all that resiststhe upwardpressureof the life-force, naturedown. That forceis likean elasticspringcoiledup beneath a mass of environmental debris,and needingonlyto be freedin orderto unfoldspontaneously and liftthe organicworldto higher is added and ever-higher planes. In thehumanfieldthemind-force to the life-force, and bothvital and psychicpowerspressforward lies across togethertowardsomeexaltedgoal. The environment the path of both and obstructstheirrise. The problemeverywhereis how to unlocktheseprisondoorsand set freetheinnate forcesofnature. THE ORGANIC ENVIRONMENT
Darwinhas taughtus thatthe chiefbarrierto the advanceof withotherplants anyspeciesofplantsoranimalsis its competition and animals that contestthe same ground. And therefore the fiercestopponentsof any speciesare the membersof the same specieswhichdemandthe same elementsof subsistence. Hence thechiefformofreliefin theorganicworldconsistsin thethinningout of competitors.Anyspeciesof animalsor plantsleftfreeto propagateat its normalrate wouldoverrunthe earthin a short timeand leaveno roomforany otherspecies. Anyspeciesthatis will crowd sufficiently vigorousto resistits organicenvironment out all othersand monopolizetheearth. If naturepermitted this therecouldbe no variety,but onlyone monotonous aspectdevoid ofinterest orbeauty. Whateverwemaythinkoftheharshmethod we cannotregretthatit is prevented, by whichthisis prevented, and aestheticattractand thatwe havea worldofvariety,interest,
iveness. I
See Applied Sociology,pp. I23-28, 233-34.
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
75I
THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
It is notgenerally realizedthatin thisrespectthesocialenvirondiffer fromtheorganicenvironment.It mentdoes not essentially is truethatMalthustaughtus thismorethana centuryago, but we go on deploringthe actionof thislaw in the humanrace,and strivingto nullifyit by all mannerof artificialdevices. That hisintelligence to robthislaw rationalmanhas thepowerthrough this ofits harsh,painfulfeaturesis beyondquestion,but whenever is attemptedthereis a generaloutcryagainstit, and thosewho sin againstnature,and attemptit are accusedofan unpardonable usuallyofa sin againstGod. RACE SUICIDE
On AprilI2, I9OI, Dr. EdwardA. Ross, in his annualaddress beforethe AmericanAcademyof Politicaland Social Sciencein oftheAmericanby the Philadelphia,speakingofthedisplacement utteredthesewords: foreign populationin thiscountry, Fora caselikethisI canfindno wordsso apt as "racesuicide."' There is no bloodshed, no violence, no assaultoftheracethatwaxesupontherace thatwanes. The higherrace quietlyand unmurmuringly itself eliminates thebittercompetition it has failedto ward ratherthanendureindividually offby collective action.2 The phrase "race suicide" was immediately taken up and echoed throughoutthe civilizedworld. " Race suicide" was loudly and widely condemned, and branded as a mark of decadence. Chief among those to make a public use of it and indulge in its wholesale condemnation was Theodore Roosevelt, who lost no opportunityto weave it into his speeches and warn his audiences against its insidious dangers to mankind. He was credited with the authorshipof the phrase,and the press took it up and scattered it broadcast over the world. Books with it as theirtitle have been written,and the literatureof foreigncountriesis now repletewith translationsof it into all languages. I The use of quotation markshere was probablynot intendedby Dr. Ross, as the wordswerenot quoted, and were here used forthe firsttime. 2 Annals of theAmericanAcademyof Political and Social Science,Philadelphia, XVIII (July,I90I), 88.
752
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY THE FALLING BIRTH-RATE
All thisis simplythelatestaspectofthegeneralalarmthathas come into the worldat the manifestdeclinein the birth-rate of civilizedcountries. Many see in it theapproachoftheend ofthe humanrace itself,and are filledwithall mannerof sinisterforeand wherea stationbodings. In France,whereit is mostextreme, aryconditionofthepopulationhas almostbeenreached,thorough by thegovscientific inquiriesintothecauseshave beeninstituted the factthat the enment,withthe generalresultof establishing limitationof familiesis in the main voluntaryand purposeful. in thecomplete Thereare manyelementsthatmustbe considered understanding of the problem,but the greattruthstandsclearly to thepopulaforththatpeopleare no longerwillingto contribute by nature. tionat therateprescribed THE LAW OF POPULATION
in all countrieshave shownthat the Furtherinvestigations by movement is general,and althoughtheproblemis complicated a largenumberof specialinfluences, therecomesforthfromamid it all a greatlaw,whichmaybe calledthelaw ofpopulation. It is verydistinctfromMalthus'"principleofpopulation,"and maybe stated in this simple form: population is inverselyproportionalto intelligence.
Whatis themeaningof thislaw? It meansthatman,in prois learningto mitigatethe cruellaw of portionto his intelligence, which consists,as already stated, in the organicenvironment, reproducing greatlyin excessof the possibilityof existence,and thenkillingoffthe surplus. By whatevername we may call it, thislaw has in factappliedto mankindin all the ages past. It stillapplies to the uncivilizedraces,and it no less appliesto the lowerclassesofcivilizedsociety. Thesestillremainprolific.They furnishthe proles,and constitutethe proletariat. But nature knowshowto keepdownpopulation,and theyare stillthevictims of the organiclaw. And in so faras the populationof civilized is permitted countries to increase,it mustbe fromtheproletariat. soldiersto gratify classesrefuselongerto furnish The enlightened and happichieftains.Theyseekcomfort theambitionofmilitary them. to obtain how and have learned They preferquality ness,
EUGENICS, EUTHENICS,
AND EUDEMICS
753
to quantity, and demandmultum nonmulta. Theyareaccomplishbut they ing the same end as nature,viz., numericaluniformity, destruction Their are doingit without and withoutpain. remedial agentis a prophylactic.They have solvedthe Malthusianproblemby thediscoveryof restraints to populationofwhichMalthus neverdreamed. EUDEMICS'
Thereare manywho look withalarmat the factthatpopulation is beingto so greatan extentrecruitedfromthe base, i.e., fromthelowerclasses. Such apprehensions are due to thealmost universalerrorthat thoseclasses are inferior to the middleand higherclasses. Thisis nottheplace to refutethiserror, and I have done it elsewhere,2 but couldit be removed,all groundsforalarm wouldbe dispelled. If thereare signsofdecadenceanywhere they are not in theproletariat. Theyare to be foundamongthepampered richand not amongthehamperedpoor. These,thoughill bred,are wellborn; theirinfusionintothepopulationimpartsto it a healthytone. It constitutes thehopeofsociety. On a former occasion3I emphasizedthisfactin languagewhich I could not now improve,and which,therefore, as a concluding to repeat: word,I willask permission The paper of this morningtreats the problemto which Galton, Karl Pearson, Ribot, Lombroso,Ferri, and many othershave devoted so much I This word,so faras I am aware, has thus farappeared onlythreetimesin print, viz., first,in the paper of ProfessorJ. Q. Dealey on "The Teaching of Sociology," read beforethe AmericanSociological Society,on December 31, I909, and published in the AmericanJournalofSociologyforMarch, I9I0, XV, 662, and in thePublications of the society,IV, I82; second,in a reviewof ProfessorC. B. Davenport's Eugenics, by Mr. Carol Aronovici,in the AmericanJournalof SociologyforJuly,19I0, XVI, I22; and, third,in ProfessorDealey's recent work, The Family in Its Sociological Aspect,Boston,19I2, p. 128; each timein a footnoteonly,but also each timecredited to ProfessorH. L. Koopman, Librarian of Brown University. ProfessorKoopman informsme that he suggested the word to ProfessorDealey in conversation,and ProfessorDealey admitsthisto be the originof it. But the wordseemsto be needed, derived as it is fromthe Greek &Aos, "the people at large," and signifying a science or doctrineof the welfareof the masses. It alliterateswell withthe othertwo words, "eugenics" and "euthenics," and yet it has a distinctmeaning of its own, greatly expandingthe wholefieldof discussion. 2 See Applied Sociology,pp. 95-II0, I29-81. 3 Remarkson a paper by ProfessorD. Collin Wells on "Social Darwinism,"read beforethe AmericanSociological Society on December 29, I906. See the American Journal ofSociology forMarch,I907, XII, 709-I0, andthePusblications ofthesociety,
I,
13I-32.
754
THE AMERICAN JOURNALOF SOCIOLOGY
attention-namely,the physiologicalimprovement of the race of men. One aspect of that problemwas thoroughly discussedyesterday,and it is remarkable that neitherthe able paper of ProfessorRoss nor any of the discussions law of of that paper once alluded to the mostimportantand best-established demography-thatpopulation is inverselyproportionalto intelligence. Of course there are other thingsof which the same generalprincipleis true. Suicide,insanity,crime,and vice increaseas we risein the scale ofintelligence. You do not findthemamonganimals,and you findthemless amongsavages and lowerclasses thanin the upperstrataof society. It is lowestin the scale oforganiclifethatwe findthehighestfecundity, and thelaw goesback through the entireanimalkingdomuntilwe have those Protozoansin whichone individual may be the parent of millionsof offspring.This law also extends upwardto the verytopmostlayersof societyand findsits maximumexpression in the veryfewwho have attainedto that loftyrealmof wisdomwhere theynotonlyunderstandtheteachingsofeugenics,but are capable ofapplying themto familylife. The doctrinedefendedby ProfessorWells is the most completeexample of the oligocentric world-view" whichis comingto prevailin the higherclasses of society,and would centerthe entireattentionof the worldupon an almost infinitesimal fractionof the humanrace and ignoreall the rest. It is trying to polishup the gildedpinnaclesof the social templeso as to make themshine a littlemorebrightly,whileentirelyneglectingthe great,coarse foundationof the selectfew, stonesupon whichit rests. The educationand preservation of the higherclasses,of the emergedhundredth, to the neglectof the submergedtenthand the restof the ninety-nine hundredths of society,coverstoo small a field. I cannotbringmyselfto workcontentedly in a fieldso narrow, howeverfascinatingin itself. Perhaps mineis a "vaulting ambition,"but I want a fieldthat shall be broad enoughto embracethe wholehumanrace. For an indefinite periodyet to come societywill continueto be recruited fromthe base. The swarmingand spawningmillionsof the lowerrankswill and continuein thefutureas in thepast to swampall thefruitsofintelligence compelsocietyto assimilatethismass of crudematerialas best it can. This is commonlylookedupon as the deplorableconsequenceofthe demographic law referredto, and it is said that societyis doomed to hopeless degeneracy. Is it possibleto take any otherview? I thinkit is, and theonly consolation,the onlyhope,lies in the truththat,so faras the nativecapacity, the potentialquality,the "promise and potency" of a higherlife are concerned,those swarming,spawningmillions,the bottomlayer of society,the proletariat,the workingclasses,the "hewersof wood and drawersof water," nay, even the denizensof the slums-that all these are by naturethe peers of the boasted "aristocracyof brains" that now dominatessocietyand looks down upon them,and the equals in all but privilegeof the most enlightened teachersof eugenics. 'Applied Sociology,p.
23.