General View of Positivism — Chapter 2 The Social Aspect Of Positivism, As Shown By Its Connexion With The General Revolutionary Movement Of Western Europe Part 4

After this brief exposition of Positive morality I must allude with equal brevity to the means by which it will be established and applied.

These are of two kinds.

The first lay down the foundations of moral training for each individual: they furnish principles, and they regulate feelings.

The second carry out the work begun, and ensure the application of the principles inculcated to practical life.

Both these functions are in the first instance performed spontaneously, under the influence of the doctrine and of the sympathies evoked by it.

But for their adequate performance a spiritual power specially devoted to the purpose is necessary.

[Moral education consists partly of scientific demonstration of ethical truth, but still more of culture of the highest sympathies] The moral education of the Positivist is based both upon Reason and on Feeling, the latter having always the preponderance, in accordance with the primary principle of the system.

The result of the rational basis is to bring moral precepts to the test of rigorous demonstration, and to secure them against all danger from discussion, by showing that they rest upon the laws of our individual and social nature.

By knowing these laws, we are enabled to form a judgment of the influence of each affection, thought, action, or habit, be that influence direct or indirect, special or general, in private life or in public.

Convictions based upon such knowledge will be as deep as any that are formed in the present day from the strictest scientific evidence, with the excess of intensity due to their higher importance and their close connexion with our noblest feelings.

Nor will such convictions be limited to those who are able to appreciate the logical value of the arguments.

We see constantly in other departments of Positive science that men will adopt notions upon trust, and carry them out with the same zeal and confidence, as if they were thoroughly acquainted with all the grounds for their belief.

All that is necessary is, that they should feel satisfied that their confidence is well bestowed, the fact being, in spite of all that is said of the independence of modern thought, that it is often given too readily.

The most willing assent is yielded every day to the rules which mathematicians, astronomers, physicists, chemists, or biologists, have laid down in their respective arts, even in cases where the greatest interests are at stake.

And similar assent will certainly be accorded to moral rules when they, like the rest, shall be acknowledged to be susceptible of scientific proof.

But while using the force of demonstration to an extent hitherto impossible, Positivists will take care not to exaggerate its importance.

Moral education, even in its more systematic parts, should rest principally upon Feeling, as the mere statement of the great human problem indicates.

The study of moral questions, intellectually speaking, is most valuable; but the effect it leaves is not directly moral, since the analysis will refer, not to our own actions, but to those of others; for all scientific investigations, to be impartial and free from confusion, must be objective, not subjective.

Now to judge others without immediate reference to self, is a process which may possibly result in strong convictions, but so far from calling out right feelings, it will, if carried too far, interfere with or check their natural development.

However, the new school of moralists is the less likely to err in this direction, that it would be totally inconsistent with that profound knowledge of human nature in which Positivism has already shown itself so far superior to Catholicism.

No one knows so well as the Positivist that the principal source of real morality lies in direct exercise of our social sympathies, whether systematic or spontaneous.

He will spare no efforts to develop these sympathies from the earliest years by every method which sound philosophy can indicate.

It is in this that moral education, whether private or public, principally consists; and to it mental education is always to be held subordinate.

I shall revert to these remarks in the next chapter, when I come to the general question of educating the People.

[Organization of Public Opinion] But however efficient the training received in youth, it will not be enough to regulate our conduct in after years, amidst all the distracting influences of practical life, unless the same spiritual power which provides the education prolong its influence over our maturity.

Part of its task will be to recall individuals, classes, and even nations, when the case requires it, to principles which they have forgotten or misinterpreted, and to instruct them in the means of applying them wisely.

And here, even more than in the work of education strictly so called, the appeal will be to Feeling rather than to pure Reason.

Its force will be derived from Public Opinion strongly organized.

If the spiritual power awards its praise and blame justly, public opinion, as I shall show in the next chapter, will lend it the most irresistible support.

This moral action of Humanity upon each of her members has always existed whenever there was any real community of principles and feelings.

But its strength will be far greater under the Positive system.

The reality of the doctrine and the social character of modern civilization give advantages to the new spiritual power which were denied to Catholicism.

[Commemoration of great men] And these advantages are brought forward very prominently by the Positive system of commemoration.

Commemoration, when regularly instituted, is a most valuable instrument in the hands of a spiritual power for continuing the work of moral education.

It was the absolute character of Catholicism, even more than the defective state of mediaeval society, that caused the failure of its noble aspirations to become the universal religion.

In spite of all its efforts, its system of commemoration has always been restricted to very narrow limits, both in time and space.

Outside these limits, Catholicism has always shown the same blindness and injustice that it now complains of receiving from its own opponents.

Positivism, on the contrary, can yield the full measure of praise to all times and all countries, without either weakness or inconsistency.

Possessing the true theory of human development, every mode and phase of that development will be celebrated.

Thus every moral precept will be supported by the influence of posterity; and this in private life as well as in public, for the system of commemoration will be applied in the same spirit to the humblest services as well as to the highest.

While reserving special details for the treatise to which this work is introductory, I may yet give one illustration of this important aspect of Positivism; an illustration which probably will be the first step in the practical application of the system.

I would propose to institute in Western Europe on any days that may be thought suitable, the yearly celebration of the three greatest of our predecessors, Caesar, St. Paul and Charlemagne, who are respectively the highest types of Greco-Roman civilization, of Mediaeval Feudalism, and of Catholicism, which forms the link between the two periods.

The services of these illustrious men have never yet been adequately recognized, for want of a sound historical theory enabling us to explain the prominent part which they played in the development of our race.

Even in St. Paul’s case the omission is noticeable.

Positivism gives him a still higher place than has been given him by Theology; for it looks upon him as historically the founder of the religion which bears the inappropriate name of Christianity.

In the other two cases the influence of Positive principles is even more necessary.

For Caesar has been almost equally misjudged by theological and by metaphysical writers; and Catholicism has done very little for the appreciation of Charlemagne.

However, notwithstanding the absence of any systematic appreciation of these great men, yet from the reverence with which they are generally regarded, we can hardly doubt that the celebration here proposed would meet with ready acceptance throughout Western Europe.

To illustrate my meaning still further, I may observe that history presents cases where exactly the opposite course is called for, and which should be held up not for approbation but for infamy.

Blame, it is true, should not be carried to the same extent as praise, because it stimulates the destructive instincts to a degree which is always painful and sometimes injurious.

Yet strong condemnation is occasionally desirable.

It strengthens social feelings and principles, if only by giving more significance to our approval.

Thus I would suggest that after doing honour to the three great men who have done so much to promote the development of our race, there should be a solemn reprobation of the two principal opponents of progress, Julian and Bonaparte; the latter being the more criminal of the two, the former the more insensate.

Their influence has been sufficiently extensive to allow of all the Western nations joining in this damnatory verdict.

[6] The principal function of the spiritual power is to direct the future of society by means of education; and, as a supplementary part of education, to pronounce judgment upon the past in the mode here indicated.

But there are functions of another kind, relating more immediately to the present; and these too result naturally from its position as an educating body.

If the educators are men worthy of their position, it will give them an influence over the whole course of practical life, whether private or public.

Of course it will merely be the influence of counsel, and practical men will be free to accept or reject it; but its weight may be very considerable when given prudently, and when the authority from which it proceeds is recognized as competent.

The questions on which its advice is most needed are the relations between different classes.

Its action will be coextensive with the diffusion of Positive principles; for nations professing the same faith, and sharing in the same education, will naturally accept the same intellectual and moral directors.

In the next chapter I shall treat this subject more in detail.

I merely mention it here as one among the list of functions belonging to the new spiritual power.

[The political motto of Positivism: Order and Progress] It will now not be difficult to show all the characteristics of Positivism are summed up in the motto, _Order and Progress_, a motto which has a philosophical as well as political bearing, and which I shall always feel glad to have put forward.

Positivism is the only school which has given a definite significance to these two conceptions, whether regarded from their scientific or their social aspect.

With regard to Progress, the assertion will hardly be disputed, no definition of it but the Positive ever having yet been given.

In the case of Order, it is less apparent;

but, as I have shown in the first chapter, it is no less profoundly true.

All previous philosophies had regarded Order as stationary, a conception which rendered it wholly inapplicable to modern politics.

But Positivism, by rejecting the absolute, and yet not introducing the arbitrary, represents Order in a totally new light, and adapts it to our progressive civilization.

It places it on the firmest possible foundation, that is, on the doctrine of the invariability of the laws of nature, which defends it against all danger from subjective chimeras.

The Positivist regards artificial Order in Social phenomena, as in all others, as resting necessarily upon the Order of nature, in other words, upon the whole series of natural laws.

[Progress, the development of Order] But Order has to be reconciled with Progress: and here Positivism is still more obviously without a rival.

Necessary as the reconciliation is, no other system has even attempted it.

But the facility with which we are now enabled, by the encyclopædic scale, to pass from the simplest mathematical phenomena to the most complicated phenomena of political life, leads at once to a solution of the problem.

Viewed scientifically, it is an instance of that necessary correlation of existence and movement, which we find indicated in the inorganic world, and which becomes still more distinct in Biology.

Finding it in all the lower sciences, we are prepared for its appearance in a still more definite shape in Sociology.

Here its practical importance becomes more obvious, though it had been implicitly involved before.

In Sociology the correlation assumes this form: Order is the condition of all Progress; Progress is always the object of Order.

Or, to penetrate the question still more deeply, Progress may be regarded simply as the development of Order; for the order of nature necessarily contains within itself the germ of all possible progress.

The rational view of human affairs is to look on all their changes, not as new Creations, but as new Evolutions.

And we find this principle fully borne out in history.

Every social innovation has its roots in the past; and the rudest phases of savage life show the primitive trace of all subsequent improvement.

[Analysis of Progress: material, physical, intellectual, and moral] Progress then is in its essence identical with Order, and may be looked upon as Order made manifest.

Therefore, in explaining this double conception on which the Science and Art of society depend, we may at present limit ourselves to the analysis of Progress.

Thus simplified it is more easy to grasp, especially now that the novelty and importance of the question of Progress are attracting so much attention.

For the public is becoming instinctively alive to its real significance, as the basis on which all sound moral and political teaching must henceforth rest.

Taking, then, this point of view, we may say that the one great object of life, personal and social, is to become more perfect in every way; in our external condition first, but also, and more especially, in our own nature.

The first kind of Progress we share in common with the higher animals; all of which make some efforts to improve their material position.

It is of course the least elevated stage of progress; but being the easiest, it is the point from which we start towards the higher stages.

A nation that has made no efforts to improve itself materially, will take but little interest in moral or mental improvement.

This is the only ground on which enlightened men can feel much pleasure in the material progress of our own time.

It stirs up influences that tend to the nobler kinds of Progress; influences which would meet with even greater opposition than they do, were not the temptations presented to the coarser natures by material prosperity so irresistible.

Owing to the mental and moral anarchy in which we live, systematic efforts to gain the higher degrees of Progress are as yet impossible; and this explains, though it does not justify, the exaggerated importance attributed nowadays to material improvements.

But the only kinds of improvement really characteristic of Humanity are those which concern our own nature; and even here we are not quite alone; for several of the higher animals show some slight tendencies to improve themselves physically.

Progress in the higher sense includes improvements of three sorts;

that is to say, it may be Physical, Intellectual, or Moral progress;

the difficulty of each class being in proportion to its value and the extent of its sphere.

Physical progress, which again might be divided on the same principle, seems under some of its aspects almost the same thing as material.

But regarded as a whole it is far more important and far more difficult: its influence on the well-being of Man is also much greater.

We gain more, for instance, by the smallest addition to length of life, or by any increased security for health, than by the most elaborate improvements in our modes of travelling by land or water, in which birds will probably always have a great advantage over us.

However, as I said before, physical progress is not exclusively confined to Man.

Some of the animals, for instance, advance as far as cleanliness, which is the first step in the progressive scale.

Intellectual and Moral progress, then, is the only kind really distinctive of our race.

Individual animals sometimes show it, but never a whole species, except as a consequence of prolonged intervention on the part of Man.

Between these two highest grades, as between the two lower, we shall find a difference of value, extent, and difficulty; always supposing the standard to be the manner in which they affect Man’s well-being, collectively or individually.

To strengthen the intellectual powers, whether for art or for science, whether it be the powers of observation or those of induction and deduction, is, when circumstances allow of their being made available for social purposes, of greater and more extensive importance, than all physical, and, _a fortiori_ than all material improvements.

But we know from the fundamental principle laid down in the first chapter of this work, that moral progress has even more to do with our well-being than intellectual progress.

The moral faculties are more modifiable, although the effort required to modify them is greater.

If the benevolence or courage of the human race were increased, it would bring more real happiness than any addition to our intellectual powers.

Therefore to the question, What is the true object of human life, whether looked at collectively or individually?

the simplest and most precise answer would be, the perfection of our moral nature;

since it has a more immediate and certain influence on our well-being than perfection of any other kind.

All the other kinds are necessary, if for no other reason than to prepare the way for this; but from the very fact of this connexion it may be regarded as their representative;

since it involves them all implicitly and stimulates them to increased activity.

Keeping then to the question of moral perfection, we find two qualities standing above the rest in practical importance, namely, Sympathy and Energy.

Both these qualities are included in the word _Heart_, which in all European languages has a different meaning for the two sexes.

Both will be developed by Positivism, more directly, more continuously, and with greater result, than under any former system.

The whole tendency of Positivism is to encourage sympathy;

since it subordinates every thought, desire, and action to social feeling.

Energy is also presupposed, and at the same time fostered, by the system.

For it removes a heavy weight of superstition, it reveals the true dignity of man, and it supplies an unceasing motive for individual and collective action.

The very acceptance of Positivism demands some vigour of character; it implies the braving of spiritual terrors, which were once enough to intimidate the firmest minds.

Progress, then, may be regarded under four successive aspects: Material, Physical, Intellectual, and Moral.

Each of these might again be divided on the same principle, and we should then discover several intermediate phases.

These cannot be investigated here; and I have only to note that the philosophical principle of this analysis is precisely the same as that on which I have based the Classification of the Sciences.

In both cases the order followed is that of increasing generality and complexity in the phenomena.

The only difference is in the mode in which the two arrangements are developed.

For scientific purposes the lower portion of the scale has to be expanded into greater detail; while from the social point of view attention is concentrated on the higher parts.

But whether it be the scale of the True or that of the Good, the conclusion is the same in both.

Both alike indicate the supremacy of social considerations; both point to universal Love as the highest ideal.