builders. There are good architects and bad ones using the same material. Environment is a "limiting condition."

It is not the new physical environment of the New World that changes our foreign immigrants within a few generations into Americans, but the cultural and social environment. It has been recognized that the Americanization of our foreign population is to be accomplished by education, by contact. When there are large homogeneous colonies of foreign-born in the large cities with their own customs and their own languages, there is little or no contact possible except in the case of the children, and the process of change is a very slow one. Cultural inertia is found here as well as in more primitive communities.

Man has an innate equipment for culture as the result of his generalized form and his large brain capacity. He is equipped with the body to use tools and his power of reflection shows him the way in which he can manufacture and employ mechanical devices. The ability to reflect gives him a religion, a ritual. It enables him to argue that he may obtain an abundance of game provided he draws upon the walls of his cave pictures of the animals he hopes to capture.

An attempt has been made, up to this point, to show that society cannot be explained as a biological organism, and that the innate tendencies of man do not in themselves create culture. It has also been noted that the inert character of the environment cannot entirely explain the difference of social levels on which the races of mankind are found.

We hear much about "original man." If this means the first animal which might be called man, we know

nothing except a few hints about his physical body. Anthropology sometimes tries to deduce the nature of the culture of original man by what archæology can tell us, but principally by the thesis that he must be something like what we find among the lowest known savages, It must not be forgotten that even the lowest races of man now living have a culture hundreds of thousands of years away from that of first man; and when we remember that culture is built by accumulation, however slow, one should hesitate before painting this original man in a very strong light.

THE GROUP MIND

Some psychologists, particularly the French School, would have us believe that society has a group mind, that the personal units of society play little part in this. There is a sort of "moral organism," as McDougall expresses it, made up of individual parts and having a definite purpose. Some adherents of this theory believe / that in this collective consciousness the resultant shows a complete fusion, the individual playing but a small rôle in this "synthesis." He is only the link, the carrier of custom transmitted from one generation to another. Freedom of action is sometimes denied the individual. Imitation is a strong force in all grades of societies, but it is the individual mind, the "great man," who initiates, who invents new ways of action. One man cannot produce a culture, but the accumulation of the activities of individual minds results in a culture.12

This does not deny that great movements are bigger than the individual, and that the great mass of mankind do nothing more than float along on the waves of social reform, or movements in art and industry. But we must

not forget that there are those who prefer to remain on the shore, and those who, although floating in this stream, have their anchors down and, when they move, set their rudders for certain direct courses.

Society is the resultant of personal units. There is little social sentiment except through the medium of individual consciousness. Personal merit and initiative are probably more immediately recognized in primitive society than in modern life. Where the life of a tribe is full of crises, stress of circumstances develops a leader. Individual fitness for leadership, politically, socially, and from the military point of view, is usually demanded among the most primitive peoples. In higher grades of savage society and in the modern world, where government has been crystallized, personality plays a far less important part.

THE SAVAGE AND CIVILIZED MAN

Many attempts have been made to draw distinctions between savage and civilized man upon the psychological side. Robinson states that there are four historical layers underlying the mind of modern man: the animal mind, the child mind, the savage mind, and the traditional civilized mind. Our animal nature comes out most prominently in matters of sex, the necessity of sleep, thirst, and hunger. Our child mind is seen in the play proclivities, which ought to be a component part of every normal individual.13 Our savage mind is one of the main subjects of this book. These strata, the animal, the child, the savage, and the civilized natures,-it seems to me, are not laid horizontally, one covering the other, but they are tipped vertically, so that no one is completely covered by another. Each appears to a

greater or less degree in the mind of every civilized man. If these factors are all present (and I think they are) an attempt to show definite stages of advance from the animal to the savage, and from the savage to civilized man, is almost futile. The continuity of cultural life from the lowest forms to those of the modern world makes it impossible to draw distinct lines separating the categories of culture.

INSTINCT

A favorite topic for discussion in regard to the nature of animal and human society, and of savage and civilized society, is the factor of instinct. The usual argument is that as human society is an outgrowth of the social life of animals, so human society takes over the instinctive equipment of the animal world. There is nothing to cause its loss. The older argument was that as instincts are stable and unchangeable, so early society is stable, hence instinctive; or the other way round, early society is instinctive, hence it is stable.

Many psychologists are now willing to agree that the principal instincts or "predispositions" of man are liable to modification of their motor parts, while their central parts remain unchanged.14

There is a large mass of literature upon instincts. Various attempts have been made to classify them. No two authorities agree as to their number or their character. There are two main difficulties in any classification. The first is an almost total ignorance of the way newly-born babies react to stimuli of various kinds. Watson has shown by experiments that the fear instinct in infants can be aroused only by the sense of falling and by a loud noise.

The second difficulty in any classification of man's "predispositions" is found in the fact that there is no inclusiveness, but a general overlapping. The parental instinct may include fright, pugnacity, and acquisition. One runs into another, fright into pugnacity. Everything man does has a double basis,-partly inherited and partly acquired.15 I have already tried to show that from the point of view of human culture we can eliminate almost everything but those characteristics of man which he learns from his fellow man. Graham Wallas writes, "In the case of man, this irradiation of instinctive action by intelligence shades into processes in which intelligence acts as an independent directing force." 2

Wissler has said that "man inherits a single 'pattern,' just as the ant inherits an 'ant pattern.'" 16 Let me amplify the figure and say that man inherits some of the factors necessary to make a pattern,-the warp alone is there to hold the fabric together; but the woof, the fillingin of the pattern, is a product of man's own invention, something he learns, and quite apart from any innate characteristics which he may have. How can there be so many different fabrics made on this warp, and so varied designs in these textiles, if this filling-in process all came from inborn tendencies? Man's environment gives him the materials for his fabric. The design grows out of his inventive faculty. Some people in making this textile allow the warp to show through; others cover it up completely with the woof; still others so manipulate the warp that a few of the threads may be eliminated altogether.

Let us limit ourselves in this discussion to the primary instincts of sex and hunger,-the old-fashioned, if you